On Jun 6, 2008, at 12:37 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But that's okay -- I asked only what "understanding a painting"
meant to you.
You're entitled to your usage.
Ek-shually, I was careful not to define it, and used "scare quotes."
I wrote:
' What is there in a WoA to "understand"? I believe it's just a matter
of seeing (or hearing) it better....
"Understanding" a painting means being able to see it with greater
clarity, ...'
Others were going on about understanding paintings or musical pieces,
etc., and not being particularly precise with that term.
"Understanding" has been hobbled by the fetters of popular use,
especially as practiced by gurus of communication, interactivity
skills, etc. It's a vague term that, for me, is a shorthand to signify
the whole range of cognitive reactions to a WoA, and those reactions
are refined and given greater range and detail as I learn more and
more about all manner of things. A great, wonerful painting from the
hey-day of Beaux Arts style, is Alma-Tadema's "Pericles Inspecting the
Parthenon Frieze." I had great admiration when I first saw a
reproduction of it, but that was a long time before I knew any Greek
history, had studied the Parthenon, etc. My admiration increased as I
learned more about it, and I discerned details that just passed me by
in a blur of stage props: his hair style and clothing, the size of the
frieze, the depth of the overhanging colonnade roof, etc. The more I
knew, the more I could see, and thus the more I "understood".
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
Michael Brady
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
