Nature & Animal Art!

[peter]

(02-26-2017, 04:17 PM)Spalea Wrote: @peter :

About #41: Thank you for your comment !

Rembrandt... When you look at his wash drawings, ink drawing, his line is so flowing freely that you could believe that if you dictated him a text he would be able to translate it spontaneously into a picture.

Van Gogh, one of the most moving painters from the expressionist movement (that I love so much !). They - him, Egon Schiele, Otto Dix, Munch, Nolde and so on - describe the torments and pangs of the human soul from a suffering humanity engaged at first in the industrial revolution then into the first world war, the 1929 crisis, and the 2nd world war...

The wild life ? I need to know it exists. The classic arts ? I need to know that some artists existed (if only not to despair of the human race).

You're welcome. What I saw, is real nice. Keep it coming. Same for others who like to draw and paint.

I agree with your description of Rembrandt. He is different from others. When I started visiting museums, most paintings seemed fore-runners of photography in that they represented a moment of time. Still time, I mean. They often compare to true pictures. Well done, but I wasn't really able to enter the world of the painter. In a way, I didn't see what I saw.  

When I saw the paintings of rembrandt, I often had the idea that the scene pictured might have happened a minute ago. Maybe he was able to capture something one could consider as typical for life in general, not for life typical for a certain period of time. Apart from that, he had something going with time. He didn't compare to Einstein and then he did. 

The scenes he pictured seem very much alive. Rembrandt seemed able to represent movement. He did it so well, that you could almost see the shadows move. At times, it felt like you were taken to another room. A room that wasn't there. He was someone who had all the skills of the trade, but used them in a different way. It seems like a painting wasn't the ultimate goal, but a means to an end. What end that was is a mystery. 

In many ways, Rembrandt was a master. The ultimate example of how to do it right and then some. It's about that 'then some'. You know it's there. You can feel it, but you're unable to find the words needed the describe what you feel. People with a gift at times seem to be representatives of something difficult to understand. I think it has to do with beauty. Humans can be true spirits at times. Creators could be the best word. Creation never is about destruction. Or taking. Rather the opposite.  

When I saw the paintings of Van Gogh, I was struck by the colours. They are overwhelming. It almost felt like I was shelled. I didn't feel the despair or madness often connected to Van Gogh, but something that moved me.  

At times, you see something that deeply moves you. It can be so overwhelming, that it can make you cry. It opens up the soul. I experienced it when I was far away with the woman I loved. Real wild country it was. We thought this could be the place where the soul of man was born. At that moment, I was standing in a river. Then ouit of nowhere, a canoe appeared. In the front was a woman with a child in her arms. The father was in the back paddling. Very slowly, the Indians went past us. Not a word was spoken, but I will not forget the exchange we had. 

I know that many people who paint (and play) are able to open up. When they do, they seem to be able to feel the beauty of life. That and the opposite. Today, the opposite of beauty often features. When you are able to home in, life can become a misery. You got to learn how to deal with it, but those able to pick up things most of us can't often are unable to do that. It needs to be expressed. As long as the means to do so are present, something will be produced. Not seldom, the painting produced in the days of expressionism are stunning. Overwhelming. Many were a result of despair, but the opposite also is often seen.

Those able to express their feelings in this way, most unfortunately, often get affected. Sooner or later, life becomes unbearable. My brother told me that many people seem unable to 'feel deeply' today. Two words that exactly captured what he felt. People like him often leave us way too soon on our own out in the dark. We can't live without them, as they produce the fire needed and keep it burning. 

What we have created in the last centuries is quite something. The Industrial Revolution really changed the world, but the prosperity that was produced has a flipside. One is that the waste produced is polluting the planet. It has significant consequences. This is apart from the loss of the natural world and those who make their home there. Two is 'The New World' selects what is needed. Mono-syllables are needed. Those able to adapt reproduce and those unable to leave. The result is something I like less and less. What I see is prosperity and ever more humans doing ok in the age and belly department, but I also see more humans unable to count to three in the department of essentials. The result is ever more parodies consuming ever more crap reminding them of emotions, love, value, insight and some kind of quality. Not seldom, they think it can be bought or teached. After every fail, more drugs are needed to keep emotions in check. 

The system we use is about producing value that can be measured in terms of money. Productivity is rising everywhere, but it has a flipside as well in that many suffer from stress. Sooner or later, those able to contribute will change their opinion on those who are not. In our country, they're contemplating developing robots to keep the elderly company. First step. It's not a real surprise. In the system we embraced, robots are the ultimate solution to every problem. They're cheaper, don't need sick leave and holidays and never fail. In the end, it's about these things, isn't it? How to 'develop' yourself out of existence, lesson one.    

I'm not saying that the Industrial Revolution resulted in a mess. It most definitely produced a lot of value, but it also has far-reaching consequences that need to be addressed. It starts with outlook and training. The question is what we need to survive and develop. Another question that needs to be answered is at what cost. 
 
The outcome of the sit-down depends on the essentials and needs of humans. I'm not a specialist in this department, but you don't need a lot to conclude that humans are quite inventive creatures. One could say we, to a degree, are creators and be close. As far as I know, those able to create do not start at the top floor, but in the heart. Most unfortunately, the heart has become unexplored territory.

Writers, composers, painters, musicians, storytellers, filmmakers, actors and all others operating in the department of creation are as important as those able to produce food or improve our health. If they are left behind, chances are those operating in a very different department will take over. This is what happened in the last fifty years. The consequence of the take-over was a neglect of anything related to creation.  

When Homo ludens left through the backdoor somewhere in the late sixties, Homo exploration also interested in money entered through the front door. The result of fifty years of 'exploration' (and money too) is an ever widening gap between those in control and those who depend on them, a loss of democracy, severe pollution, a lack of interest in the public cause, a lack of responsable actions and millions upon millions trying to escape reality at every possible opportunity. Life has become a race downhill in many respects and people are angry everywhere. 

All in all, one could say that the time to analyse a few things has arrived. Although it may seem different, I'm quite optimistic. The reason is young people. This time, they will show and force a few changes. A new policy is needed and so are responsible actions. As the old rulers have proven to be inadequate as well as heartless and greedy, they are on their way out. Interesting times ahead of us.

I hope the arts and philosophy will become more important soon. Not saying that Plato, Rembrandt, Bach, Churchill (liked painting as well), Hemingway or Arthur Miller would have made great presidents (not their cup of tea, I think), but we could do with a new outlook and a bit of responsability. If I would have a say, I would go for new public broadcasting companies. I'm quite done with one-legged ducks and their bloody circles. Unfortunately, my department is tigers. Reply