Comments on: Meaning and neurophysiology http://www.rondowd.com/2009/01/meaning-and-neurophysiology/ Reflections on visual art, place, psychotherapy and nonduality Tue, 03 Aug 2010 01:24:26 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: ron dowd http://www.rondowd.com/2009/01/meaning-and-neurophysiology/comment-page-1/#comment-125 ron dowd Thu, 05 Feb 2009 04:41:34 +0000 http://www.rondowd.com/?p=450#comment-125 You raise interesting examples Reuben. I'm thinking of the Pollack we have in Canberra: Blue Poles. The thing for me is that it's a whole, a Gestalt, and there's a mystery about that gestalt that can't be adequately defined by describing its constituents - be they at the level of gesture and drip or at the level of the materials involved. I see Polanyi as holding poetry and the arts in general in such high regard (equivalent to science) that deconstructive "explanations" will never define or explain a real work. Oh, the tag... thanks, will investigate. You raise interesting examples Reuben. I’m thinking of the Pollack we have in Canberra: Blue Poles. The thing for me is that it’s a whole, a Gestalt, and there’s a mystery about that gestalt that can’t be adequately defined by describing its constituents – be they at the level of gesture and drip or at the level of the materials involved. I see Polanyi as holding poetry and the arts in general in such high regard (equivalent to science) that deconstructive “explanations” will never define or explain a real work. Oh, the tag… thanks, will investigate.

]]> By: headwrapper http://www.rondowd.com/2009/01/meaning-and-neurophysiology/comment-page-1/#comment-113 headwrapper Mon, 02 Feb 2009 20:44:32 +0000 http://www.rondowd.com/?p=450#comment-113 <i>“the operations of a higher level cannot be accounted for by the laws governing the particulars, which form the next-lower level”</i> This seems to apply to visual or art communication too, to a degree. But it makes me wonder... do you think that 'style' can <b>be</b> content. When I look at Jackson Pollack it seems that the style and vocabulary, (drip, all-over etc.) IS the content. Also in some late Renaissance paintings the content became, for the artist, an excuse to exercise his style --which then was the 'real' or esoteric content. It seems that way with some speakers too who are said to "be all style and no content" but then isn't style content? And that may apply to some writers too, like Joyce in Finnegan's Wake. Or, what if an artist were to hang mirrors in gallery alla duChamp --what would the content of the mirror be? But I have a hunch that I'm way off on this one. Am I missing something? And oh, ahem, btw, pssst --you've been tagged.: http://headwrapper.blogspot.com/ “the operations of a higher level cannot be accounted for by the laws governing the particulars, which form the next-lower level”

This seems to apply to visual or art communication too, to a degree. But it makes me wonder… do you think that ’style’ can be content. When I look at Jackson Pollack it seems that the style and vocabulary, (drip, all-over etc.) IS the content. Also in some late Renaissance paintings the content became, for the artist, an excuse to exercise his style –which then was the ‘real’ or esoteric content. It seems that way with some speakers too who are said to “be all style and no content” but then isn’t style content? And that may apply to some writers too, like Joyce in Finnegan’s Wake. Or, what if an artist were to hang mirrors in gallery alla duChamp –what would the content of the mirror be? But I have a hunch that I’m way off on this one. Am I missing something?
And oh, ahem, btw, pssst –you’ve been tagged.:
http://headwrapper.blogspot.com/

]]>