The first one is a better example of pointillism. It's a technique using only dots - like the printing of a newspaper. The second one is harder to see, but it was meant that way. You are supposed to look at it all academically and seriously, until someone points out that it's a close-up of a cow's head. The technique tself becomes the art, because their isn't much else to call "art".
Where? The black area? Is it a cave painting cow? I don't see it. Horns? Snout? Definitely looks like a cave entrance in lower right... the portcullis looking affair... Lasceux has been closed right? Is the cow the dark mass in the upper left? GerberDunkin, Sweet. Bitch. That was the perfect fucking example of intent. The image of the dog hunched over and SQUEEZING it's bowels... Nothing more ludicrous than a dog shitting. Now that's art... Reminds me, my grandmother used to have a brass statue of a dog shitting. Yes. The very same gwama. She had a cast iron cock, too. No, you dirty minded pieces of shit. A rooster. She used it as a door stop. I saw the very same things. Now it's a cows head... I... vaguely see it. Maybe if shadows are thrown in around the shape of the cow to confuse the image. That little dangly thing for instance... Hmm. Had a thread about Murder once. A murder of crows. You were there briefly. Is it a murder of ravens, too?
<img src="http://www.sciforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=3146"> [/center] On the right side the large black area is one ear follow it down and to the left and it is the side of the cows face in shadow the forhead and the bridge of the nose are all in white til it gets down to the nostrils etc etc I have the advantage that I was a sissy boy art student years ago Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!
Holy.Fuck. I ....see it. The cow I mean- its standing on the right hand, lower corner. On its forehead, upper left near the peak of his skull, is what looks like a T scratched on to it. The dangling black thing that I could not explain is its right eye. I finally see it. And I can 'shift paradigms' as well and see the 4 people walking out from a cave onto a canyon. The man I said was at the front slouching as if to take a pic with his camera is its right nostril. Sweet.
Fuck. There it is. As soon as I read the man with the camera being the nostril it leapt out like a screaming bovine monstrosity. Amazing shit. It reminds me of those computer generated pictures where you have to unfocus your eyes and they turn 3d. It just pops right the fuck out. Damn.
You did. In a way. I was trying to see it from Path's description and I didn't. Then I went down to your post and it just popped right out.
Actually I was just fucking with you guys it's an old sailor trimming the mainsail of a schooner. The black bit in the center is his unrequited love for his sister in law...see it now?
I'm still goggling over that cow. The dalmation was fucking easy. That cow is amazing. And just like Gendanken's original mention of this in the other thread. Once seen it cannot be unseen. I also can "switch paradigms" and see the people and the cave (it's the portcullis that does it) but even so the cow is still there. It never completely fades because it's so obvious. Damn.
Gendy's Q:What, pray tell, does this mean? Lucy: “ Android: "Beautiful? Why on earth do you presume that beauty was the artist's [delete]? No." Exactly! Beauty is not always the outcome of art. Art does not HAVE to be beautiful. By the way is this the android I have been missing so much? I tried to email the bugger and it returned mailerdeamon. Please pm or email if it is you. I thought it may be Dearprudence under another name and I haven't heard from him in a while. Invert: Dada was (or is) a movement not a person. No I am not 'disturbed' by beauty. I do not find it incongruent with the decay that surrounds it because it will also decay and I do not find decay disturbing but natural (this includes my own). Beauty is. Ugliness is. Decay is; if one is disturbed perhaps it is out of lack of this acceptance. Aesthetic nihilism can also contain beauty dependent on how it is arranged. Even violence has its beauty (meaning anything that is violent visually).
Lucysnow: Then you, looking on Bacon's work or for that matter listening to Bach or Wagner the same way you would listen to Britanny Spears, would resemble that cow up there in the drawing. Anyway, thread's dead.
Gendy: Being moved by something isn't necessarily disturbing. Anyway I don't listen to Britney Spears.
Semantics, I should think. Think about it. Being "moved" implies being altered or shifted or jostled or... disturbed. After you've been "moved" you are not the same as you were before. You've been moved. To be disturbed would be a similar phenomena. It's just not so cliched as "moved" that it's practically lost any meaning. Unless you mean being moved as in a bowel movement...? Which brings to mind the dog hunched over squeezing out his artwork once more. Shame. Had some nice stuff going in here a while back. That damn cow though. I can't stop seeing it. Can you? I can shift so that I can see the people and the cave but still the cow persists in the image like a ghost. Never wholly vanishing as it was before the realization.
Lucy: Yes you do, you chiclet popping lazy skank! Kidding, kidding- Vert's right, 'tis semantics. "Moved" is just a mellow way of my much impassioned word of 'disturb', but its same. And Kolby rocks. Exactly. Damn- if I had more time I'd have much to say here. Nice combo. That's my point, and perfect metaphor for the Thyself. Once seen, never to disposed of. Its impossible.
Gendy: "Yes you do, you chiclet popping lazy skank! Kidding, kidding-" Yea, yea, yea but I know you lay with spread legs drenched in moisture as Ricky Martin croons. Listen lady, you don't fool me! ...and what about all those R. Crumb comics you paid some Mexican to paint and frame on canvas? And then had the NERVE to call them original reproductions! Tis good, after that lousy debate, to have something legitimate to laugh at. Thanks!! Did you ever find Kolby's 'Venus of Chernobyl'? By the way that blotch on top is a close-up of a kitten's face. Cow indeed!
Lucy: Lousy debate, my bunyons. I misunderstood you to mean you would massacre art by making it so...inclusive. There is this chic at work who's, like, so open minded you know, and she, like, tells you how open minded she is with this annoying glow usually found on the, like, 'modern' thinker who never thoroughly thinks anything, but you know, like, totally loves everything! She'd be as open to Nietzsche as she would to Oprah, or mix Bach and Spears in one truly offensive cokctail. Oh, and I loathe New Agers. Yes, disturbing. I really do like this Kolby. There's a big penis in there if you look hard enough.
Gendy: "Lousy debate, my bunyons" I was referring to the Bush/Kerry debate. G: she is with this annoying glow usually found on the, like, 'modern' thinker who never thoroughly thinks anything, but you know, like, totally loves everything! She'd be as open to Nietzsche as she would to Oprah, or mix Bach and Spears in one truly offensive cokctail. Well no I don't think everything is the same or of comparable value. I do believe that everything has its value, has its place. Britney's core audience has been seven to 12 year old girls, and boys discovering their erections. What's with the Britney thing anyway? She is being given too much credit by those who slay her. G: Oh, and I loathe New Agers. What is a New Ager? G:There's a big penis in there if you look hard enough. No,no its a puss. ...okay its a puss with a fossil stuck on its lower right cheek.
