LUCINDA NELSON DHAVAN: "The color of water, the shape of wind—if everyone thought of God in those terms and realized how far beyond human senses and ownership God must be, many of the feelings that divide us would be harmlessly blown away. Back to the basics, we should say, the true fundamentals—Earth supports us all; fire lights and warms us all; water sustains and purifies; air . . . air is the life of our life, the wind in our sails, the cool breeze on a summer day. Let's listen."
4 comments:
Hi Ted!
Sorry I couldn’t visit you for the last two weeks! I’m trying to catch-up and see the wonders you have around!
And the ice and grass series is awesome!
Anyhow, my favourites are the Farm (the greens) and the excellent Magritte's quote!
Meanwhile, one of the most beautiful Forts in India waits you and your comments at Blogtrotter: – The Amber Fort! Enjoy and have a great weekend!
You have presented a conundrum: compare and contrast "Radial Composition" and "Shape of Wind" or let them stand alone. I prefer "Radial Composition" because it catches the light, and allows the eye to concentrate on the perspective and the negative space. Elements of the abstract that elevates the photo to a level of multiple interpretations. "Shape of Wind" leaves me cold - pun intended.
GMG - I'm glad you liked the Magritte quote. It was a real surprise to me that Magritte had worked in photography. There is a book I found on Amazon that tells more. I'm off to see your latest treasures - take my GMG vacation as soon as I finish here.
Jane - It hadn't occurred to me until you made your comment that they were in a meaningful way contraries. I'm not sure I would say I'm drawn to any negative space in "Radial Comp," but I'm definitely given the chance to let my eye look beyond the plane of the action. I don't think I thought about that consciously though felt its influence.
Shape of the wind is a petrified surface with no breaks to see behind/beyond. In some sense I think I may have sensed that distinction in naming them, but it wasn't consciously on my mind. What drew me was the petrified wind of the title and the way the eye is led diagonally to a dead end.
My recollection is that the first time you saw "Shape of the Wind," you were uncomfortable with its flatness. That must bother you still and I underdstand it. I'm not sure I meant it to be too comfortable, but for me there are all kinds of allusions suggested.
In any case, I don't see one as better than the other, just different, and you've convinced me, perhaps, they might be a diptych.
Alas, lost in my drive failure was another that looked like an art nouveau scroll made of ice.
Thanks for stopping by.
Post a Comment