Fecundity

V

vivi

The Force is Strong With This One
Hi all,

I wanted to share my art and also ask people to play a little game, and ask you what do u see behind the structures of this composition?

all right reserved Vincent Ubags 2010
 

Attachments

  • 2.jpg
    2.jpg
    94.9 KB · Views: 27
Hello vivi :)

It is customary for new members to introduce themselves in the Newbies section: http://www.cassiopaea.org/forum/index.php?board=39.0
 
Hello, Vivi - saw your introductory post and am curious as to how you discovered this forum and why you joined.

I'm also curious as to why you want our impressions of your artwork right off the bat before we have gotten to know a little something about you?

FWIW, I did a "blink" of the painting and for some reason found it a tad unsettling. Admittedly, I'm not a big fan of abstract art, so my interpretation could be off.
 
NormaRegula said:
Hello, Vivi - saw your introductory post and am curious as to how you discovered this forum and why you joined. I felt this forum as a convergence point of people who defines themselves as "searcher"
Click to expand...

Hello i explained the reasons in the newbies section. I felt this forum as a convergence point of people who defines themselves as "searcher" looking further than Mtv, MacDonald and the fake appearance.
NormaRegula said:
I'm also curious as to why you want our impressions of your artwork right off the bat before we have gotten to know a little something about you?
Click to expand...
i thought it'd be funnier to introduce myself with a little "game"
NormaRegula said:
FWIW, I did a "blink" of the painting and for some reason found it a tad unsettling. Admittedly, I'm not a big fan of abstract art, so my interpretation could be off.
Click to expand...
it's not abstract, it's semi abstract, i just want to see if i can find here people who lean how to read between the lines, if nobody find anything, i won't say nothing about any explanation because Jung told me it was a secret.
 
vivi said:
it's not abstract, it's semi abstract, i just want to see if i can find here people who lean how to read between the lines, if nobody find anything, i won't say nothing about any explanation because Jung told me it was a secret.
Click to expand...


Hi vivi,

It is selfish on your part to ask for the cooperation of this forum advancing that later you are not going to have the consideration of trying at least, to clarify what are we supposed to see in your subjective art of work.

Esoteric glossary
http://glossary.cassiopaea.com/glossary.php?id=40&lsel=E

External considering is rooted in objective awareness of the environment. Its opposite, internal considering, is rooted in attachment to a subjective inner state, to one's own comfort of preconceptions or desires.
Click to expand...

Internal considering can be likened to man's inner predator. It feeds itself by engaging in subjective fantasies where it thinks it is other than it is. It will also seek to gain external confirmation for its distorted self-image by manipulating others to confirm it in its views. Man may go to much trouble to make an impression, simply in order to have his own illusory, internally considered self-image reflected back to himself from others. All success in such manipulation feeds the predator and confirms it in its internal considering and accordingly removes the center of gravity of man's inner life away from objectivity. Internal considering is in very concrete terms man's natural enemy who seeks to prevent man from being himself. The predator will at all times prefer an illusion of virtue to the naked truth about itself. Still, it is not useful to morally judge or condemn the predator, just like it is useless to condemn a cat for eating mice. Still, one must disengage from identifying with this predator. Claiming to Work while engaging in internal considering is a contradiction in terms. The forms of internal considering can however be extremely subtle and one cannot always detect them, thus constant vigilance is required. The predator of internal considering may well claim to engage in merciless self-observation, to aspire to consciousness and being and any other virtues and even trick itself to believe it is progressing towards these goals while all the while only feeding its vanity and desire for recognition.
Click to expand...
 
Hi vivi,

vivi said:
oki, delete this topic
Click to expand...

Do you think that request is externally considerate?
I suggest you read or re-read the quote on external and internal considering posted by Ana, and maybe see how it applies to your behaviour in this thread -- if you're actually sincere about participating in this forum, that is :)
 
yes i am sincere, i just wanted to share my art, at least art is subjective, so everybody can see whatever he wants to see, and it was not about self recognition but more in a way of find people who share the same interest than me :)
 
well ok, in 2010, anybody have seen Hermes? where is he, what's happens when 4D going to 3D and u didn't ask anything :s
 
Hi vivi,

Your name for this piece of yours was "esoteric n' roll..." and I see on your blog that you've got some rave reviews on this piece. Now below is an excerpt on objective art by Mouravieff and Gurdjieff and then perhaps you will understand how the forum views art. :)

Boris Mouravieff GNOSIS The Esoteric Cycle said:
In the esoteric sense, Symbols are always revealed, and their deeper meaning is precise and cannot be subject to free interpretation, since, whether expressed in human words, diagrams, or works of Art, they express objective truths that have been reached in a higher state of consciousness. Therefore a symbol that is of value esoterically speaking could be partly or completely understood, depending on the level of consciousness reached by the one who tries to understand its meaning. But the measure to which it is understood will not change its general meaning, which will remain the same whatever the level of comprehension. It cannot be otherwise, since, as we have said, revealed symbols give access to a world that is situated beyond simple subjectivism. It is ruled by objectively valid ideas, of which theyare the expression.

In other words, these symbols are messages intended for those in search of the Truth. They are transmitted from a higher world to the world here below, and not from man to man, as in the symbolist schools of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Every symbol which has some esoteric validity therefore contains in itself a sum of real knowledge — of Gnosis—touching on certain aspects, facts, or laws of the noumcnal world that is beyond our senses. Simultaneously, it offers a key that helps us to decipher its deepest integral meaning.
Click to expand...

ISOTM said:
"Why, of course not!" I said. "Art, poetry, thought, are phenomena of quite a different order."
"Of exactly the same order," said G. "These activities are just as mechanical as everything else. Men are machines and nothing but mechanical actions can be expected of machines."
Click to expand...


ISOTM said:
"At the moment it is not yet clear to you," G. once said, "that people living on the earth can belong to very different levels, although in appearance they look exactly the same. Just as there are very different levels of men, so there are different levels of art.

"I do not call art all that you call art, which is simply mechanical reproduction, imitation of nature or other people, or simply fantasy, or an attempt to be original. Real art is something quite different.

Among works of art, especially works of ancient art, you meet with many things you cannot explain and which contain a certain something you do not feel in modern works of art. But as you do not realize what this difference is you very soon forget it and continue to take everything as one kind of art.

And yet there is an enormous difference between your art and the art of which I speak. In your art everything is subjective—the artist's perception of this or that sensation; the forms in which he tries to express his sensations and the perception of these forms by other people. In one and the same phenomenon one artist may feel one thing and another artist quite a different thing. One and the same sunset may evoke a feeling of joy in one artist and sadness in another. Two artists may strive to express exactly the same perceptions by entirely different methods, in different forms; or entirely different perceptions in the same forms—according to how they were taught, or contrary to it. And the spectators, listeners, or readers will perceive, not what the artist wished to convey or what he felt, but what the forms in which he expresses his sensations will make them feel by association. Everything is subjective and everything is accidental, that is to say, based on accidental associations—the impression of the artist and his 'creation'" (he emphasized the word "creation"), "the perceptions of the spectators, listeners, or readers.

"In real art there is nothing accidental. It is mathematics. Everything in it can be calculated, everything can be known beforehand. The artist knows and understands what he wants to convey and his work cannot produce one impression on one man and another impression on another, presuming, of course, people on one level. It will always, and with mathematical certainty, produce one and the same impression.

"At the same time the same work of art will produce different impressions on people of different levels. And people of lower levels will never receive from it what people of higher levels receive. This is real, objective art. Imagine some scientific work—a book on astronomy or chemistry. It is impossible that one person should understand it in one way and another in another way. Everyone who is sufficiently prepared and who is able to read this book will understand what the author means, and precisely as the author means it. An objective work of art is just such a book, except that it affects the emotional and not only the intellectual side of man." "Do such works of objective art exist at the present day?" I asked. "Of course they exist," answered G. "The great Sphinx in Egypt is such a work of art, as well as some historically known works of architecture, certain statues of gods, and many other things. There are figures of gods and of various mythological beings that can be read like books, only not with the mind but with the emotions, provided they are sufficiently developed.

In the course of our travels in Central Asia we found, in the desert at the foot of the Hindu Kush, a strange figure which we thought at first was some ancient god or devil. At first it produced upon us simply the impression of being a curiosity. But after a while we began to feel that this figure contained many things, a big, complete, and complex system of cosmology. And slowly, step by step, we began to decipher this system. It was in the body of the figure, in its legs, in its arms, in its head, in its eyes, in its ears; everywhere. In the whole statue there was nothing accidental, nothing without meaning. And gradually we understood the aim of the people who built this statue. We began to feel their thoughts, their feelings. Some of us thought that we saw their faces, heard their voices. At all events, we grasped the meaning of what they wanted to convey to us across thousands of years, and not only the meaning, but all the feelings and the emotions connected with it as well. That indeed was art!"
Click to expand...
 
vivi said:
Hi all,

I wanted to share my art and also ask people to play a little game, and ask you what do u see behind the structures of this composition?

all right reserved Vincent Ubags 2010
Click to expand...

A "vivid" marine garden.????? :cool: wellcome vivi!!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Trending content

Back
Top Bottom