The Hardest Part Is Seeing What's Right In Front Of You
The way you see things is not the way they are, but the way you are, in fact.
I carefully look at my ergonomic chair before sitting down at my desk. What would it think of me if it had sensations and emotions involved in the laws of sensitivity? As a rule, these dispositions are found especially in painters, and felt as a grace, as an uncreated divine energy. And the eyes cannot depict people’s thoughts by means of figures or things, only a handful of artists manage to do this by following the concept: “the object visually represented in a coherent image means something other than what it really is”.
Okay, I’m sitting in the chair. But immediately my gaze goes to the painting on the wall in front of the office. Another thing that willingly fills my eyes with the beauty of a spring landscape, giving way to experiences that took place a long time ago, remaining only mine. I let these experiences manifest themselves as intermediate spirits, in the excitement that seems to prompt me to carefully investigate the nature and depths of everything that surrounds me.
As can be seen, impressions caused by things, but especially thoughts about sensations characterized by depth, which can be more difficult to explain in words, are the source of ideas that make an artist a good observer of the surrounding things, even when other activities distract them.
Obviously, the realism that I show through a way of being, through an exuberant state of mind and through a lot of words, linking the meaning of each thought to some external thing, I came to evaluate my vision according to the principle: “The way I see things is not the way they are, but the way I really am.”
Does the work you focus on bring new experiences of visual representation through a predominance of emotions over reality produced by the oscillation between symbol and meaning?
I ask myself a question: to what extent does the eye need sight to be able to penetrate the reality of a picture based on symbolic meanings and in the middle of which, through vague relations with psychology, various games on the stage of life are suggested?
To a lesser or greater degree, according to the image whose object not only signifies the idea, but is itself. Without losing its meaning, the image of the eye is a symbolic image in that it materializes both in mirroring and in reality, but above all independently from a subjective point of view.
Obviously, what is repeated in the vision of the artist’s eye, acquiring the significance of a symbolic image and becoming a form of expression of the idea of “isolated fact”, is precisely that wonderful possibility of discovering something extremely deep in a reality capable of representing the forms of a higher world that intends to be the imprint of the absolute. For both the chair and the painting, as an immediate result of the action of the stimuli on the sense organs, are each accompanied by a mood and a generous affective coloration, making my passion for art remain constant and accentuate more and more that Wasotelas Otasojiteyi Relatheanek,the beautiful embraced by inner feelings.
Oops, I missed that. I never thought the eye could be sentimental. For as I admired everything around me, my gaze seemed to require me to turn my head towards certain points of real interest which I could not overlook. In vain I strove to control my eyes, in vain I tried to forget the things that leaped into my eyes. Something demanded of me, a strange power urged me to remember that I watched with great curiosity, like a contest between great visionaries, the dozens or hundreds of demonstrations that beauty lays before those who recognize good taste when it appears in their way.
Can your creative spirit grasp the things around you as particular cases of intervention of logic in a “dynamism that preserves its sensitivity”?
In Othello, the famous play of Shakespeare, there are two admirable scenes in which Iago injects the Moor with all the poison of jealousy, out of hatred, because he promoted Cassio to the rank of lieutenant, although he had not distinguished himself by any feat of arms. By committing this crime, subjugating Othello’s soul with ferocious skill, Iago proceeds in such a way as to leave the impression that he is doing him a favor, and Othello thanks him by passionately striking him with the dagger he gives.
In this scene, the dagger is the thing that particularly attracted my attention, representing a symbol of the harder moments and even of a dark part of the human soul, having a moral problem in sight. Therefore, what the thing expresses, through the symbol, is precisely what decisively determines my attitude towards art, perceived not as a blinding luminosity that destroys the historical individual, but as a much more immediate reality that bears the consequences of an acute and invasive experience.
Shakespeare was an artist sensitive to everything that happens around him, because he knew how to transform experiences into symbols, obviously with the help of things. It is not by chance that the subtle eye of the artist, even if it appears as independent, a fact that belongs only to an appearance of normality, represents the unity of mood that the power of light to animate beings and things produces in itself. But the subtlety of the eye is, at the same time, a consequence of the struggle that light has with shadow.
The idea is the following. The more the eye leans towards color, in the spectrum of a particular light projected vertically on the canvas, the more its direct possessor is animated by the desire to ecstasy, crossing the border of physical reality. So he can give a special meaning to the picture of the world. But the more your eye leans toward the depth of the symbols brought forth from the darkness of suffering and inner struggle, the easier it is to adjust your vision to the area of reactions, emotions, and senses.
This time the leadership, under the sign of the mode of reporting to the image, takes control of the connection between things and emotions, specifying that what you see up close will not always be open to the view from a distance.
In this case, the image in which you mirror yourself is a description of the thing around you, even in front of you !
Is it not so? It seems surprising that the eyes could invoke psychic agitation alongside other elements arranged in harmony, to such an extent that the artistic spirit encompasses them together as some particular cases of intervention of logic in a “dynamism that preserves its sensitivity”. Often things are dominated by a certain dynamism in which antagonistic relationships are less visible, which gives them a more pronounced aspect of materiality.
The Hardest Part Is Seeing What’s Right In Front Of You. I say this because many times we see, but we do not realize the value of what we see. Or, as someone well said, the detail is the one that enriches the moment, the one that can change the world: and it finds its origin only inside us, then it is reflected outside in the form of things.
