thinking about looking

a bunch of conversations and reading that's coagulating in my head...

"We are creating an image of ourselves,
we are attempting to resemble this image...

We live in the cities,
cities live in us
time passes.
We move from one city to another,
from one country to another.
We change languages,
we change habits,
we change opinions,
we change clothes,
we change everything.
Everything changes. And fast.
Images above all..."

- wim wenders, notebook on cities and clothes


DH: I suppose essentially I am saying we are not sure what the world looks like. An awful lot of people think we do, but I don't.

MG: So you believe it's a mystery that can still be explored and, what's more, that it always will be?

DH: Yes, it will. A two-dimensional surface can eaily be copied in two dimensions. It's three dimensions that are hard to get onto two. That involves making a lot of decisions. You have to stylize it or something, interpret it. You've got to accept the flat surface. Not try to pretend it's not there. Doesn't that mean that we learn how to get used to pictures and interpret them? And isn't that one reason why we are fascinated by pictures? I certainly am. I've always believed that pictures make us see the world. Without them, I'm not sure what anybody would see. A lot of people think they know what the world looks like because they've seen it on television. But if you are deeply fascinated by what the world really looks like, you are forced to be very interested in any way of making a picture that you come across.

David Hockney talking to Martin Gayford, from A Bigger Message, Conversations with David Hockney (aka The Bible)


on an elementary level, the physical universe does not exist in a deterministic form, but rather as a collection of probabilities, or possible outcomes.
 -wikipedia, philosophy of physics, indeterminism


Perhaps we've been too conditioned by photography to percieve single images as single moments. After all, it does take an eye time to move across scenes in real life.
- Scott McCloud, Understanding Comics


when you draw an apple you put a line down where you see the edge. but walk up to the apple and look - there's no line there.
-David Brian Wilson (he said something like that)


something else i can't remember where i read and am paraphrasing (Proust or someone talking about Proust maybe):
the fragmented and intense nature of human vision, made of pieces and associations and memories. the after image; the few moments after seeing something that you can play it before your eyes (if you were paying attention) before it's gone. the way that artists use that after image: looking at the thing and then down at the paper and back at the thing and then at the paper. i wonder if, with practice, we hold onto it a little longer.


Logicomix: a graphic novel about Bertrand Russell and the history of mathematical logic.
{spoiler alert}

it's about people who based their life and their work on the notion that the world is fundamentally knowable and that science can explain everything only to then prove that the world is fundamentally unknowable. (they go crazy).


Something my husband said: your head has a bunch of wave receptors like eyes and ears. your ears are sensitive to audio waves and your eyes are sensitive to light waves. 'sensitive to' doesn't mean you can see the whole truth of the thing; it just means sensitive to. it is what it is.
light bounces off something and the something reflects it in a certain way and we say, oh that's blue. but it's not blue it just has a certain way of bouncing light. we might just as well talk about the wave-bounciness of things as their colour. 

No comments: