Expecting Rain

Go to main page
It is currently Sat December 16th, 2017, 07:27 GMT

All times are UTC




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 306 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Wed March 20th, 2013, 00:23 GMT 
User avatar

Joined: Thu May 14th, 2009, 10:13 GMT
Posts: 2326
Location: Venice London
raging_glory wrote:
I see a dog and another person on the other side of her! :shock:


I was saying that too.....but I was afraid to sound too weird....
but if I'm in good company, I'll say that too..
:)

just one thing:
are we sure they are brush strokes and not.......simple reflections on a dirty glass and/or impurities of the pictures?
:roll:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed March 20th, 2013, 00:28 GMT 
Mercury Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed September 14th, 2011, 13:25 GMT
Posts: 12325
Location: Wherever I am welcome
I haven't seen them in person so it's difficult to say, but I doubt very seriously that there would be anything reflective in front of the paintings, and also the faces are too abstract to be real reflections, imo. It adds a real element of mystery and makes them even more intriguing. I sure wish I could see them for real.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed March 20th, 2013, 00:49 GMT 

Joined: Sat September 17th, 2011, 01:08 GMT
Posts: 754
that's why i posted three pictures from different angles- i see it in each one. i think there are mirrors in the gallery though- they seem to be rather large ones. i hope i'm not out of line bringing this up... i'm just puzzled.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed March 20th, 2013, 16:46 GMT 
Mercury Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed September 14th, 2011, 13:25 GMT
Posts: 12325
Location: Wherever I am welcome
I'm pretty sure someone already mentioned this, but these paintings remind me of Jack Fate's closing soliloquy in M&A. We have the fair garden views and the higher plateau scenes.

Jack Fate: I was always a singer and maybe no more then that. Sometimes it's not enough to know the meaning of things, sometimes we have to know what things don't mean as well. Like what does it mean to not know what the person you love is capable of? Things fall apart, especially all the neat order of rules and laws. The way we look at the world is the way we really are. See it from a fair garden and everything looks cheerful. Climb to a higher plateau and you'll see plunder and murder. Truth and beauty are in the eye of the beholder. I stopped trying to figure everything out a long time ago.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Wed March 20th, 2013, 21:41 GMT 

Joined: Sat September 17th, 2011, 01:08 GMT
Posts: 754
thanks for your responses raging glory and giuseppe. i guess i'm not totally losing it, but as far as the explanation... who knows. maybe someday we'll get the opportunity to see these. until then, i guess i should leave it alone... don't want to get too dylanoligisty on the people :lol: :oops:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu March 21st, 2013, 07:55 GMT 

Joined: Tue November 13th, 2012, 17:27 GMT
Posts: 1967
Location: Passing through
There is no glass in front of the paintings, but the varnish renders them slightly glossy. The colour is applied in fine, slightly translucent layers, somethimes of different hues, probably to give it some depth. The things you see on the foto do not come across when one stands in front of them. I think they come from overlaying levels of colour. Maybe the foto had more details, that he then decided to not paint? After all, in a foto one sees everything with the same depth of focus; that might not be practical or practicable in a painting.

I'm not saying that there is absolutely not a riddle in the pictures, but when standing in front of it, those structures do not come out as strongly as in the foto.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu March 21st, 2013, 12:43 GMT 
Mercury Member
User avatar

Joined: Wed September 14th, 2011, 13:25 GMT
Posts: 12325
Location: Wherever I am welcome
I see at least two human faces (and a dog) on the right of the grey haired woman and the upper face is in the same position and resembles the face on the right of the Planet Waves cover.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu March 21st, 2013, 13:27 GMT 

Joined: Tue November 13th, 2012, 17:27 GMT
Posts: 1967
Location: Passing through
I see at least one other face and a dog, and lo and behold! their'e much better done than the faces of the two main characters... :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu March 21st, 2013, 16:38 GMT 

Joined: Sun March 22nd, 2009, 18:31 GMT
Posts: 790
Location: Brussels
:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:
For laugh of the day, thank you


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu March 21st, 2013, 21:38 GMT 

Joined: Sat September 17th, 2011, 01:08 GMT
Posts: 754
Mutabor wrote:
I see at least one other face and a dog, and lo and behold! their'e much better done than the faces of the two main characters... :lol:
wedding wrote:
:lol: :lol: :lol:
For laugh of the day, thank you

not sure how to take your responses mutabor and wedding- are you kidding about seeing it mutabor :?. i'm not claiming it's not some sort of accidental impression, but on the other hand, it makes sense to me with the feeling of new orleans. i thought he said something about being able to sense spirits there or something like that. didn't he also say something one time about how there is a world that we can't see, and that it's in some way more real than our idea of reality (i might be making that up, but i thought he said something about that some time).

anyway, i'll say the sensible thing.... i'm sure there is some kind of logical explanation :wink:. i could say he wouldn't be the first artist to do things like this, durer comes to mind. but seriously, i honestly don't want to start any brouhaha- maybe i need just need my eyes (or my head) checked :lol:.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu March 21st, 2013, 23:40 GMT 

Joined: Tue November 13th, 2012, 17:27 GMT
Posts: 1967
Location: Passing through
No, I was not kidding, when looking at the photos looking for the dog & lady I can clearly see them. But I do not think that they where painted there as a purposefull puzzle, and I could not see any of them while looking at the picture in reality. I was also serious when writing that the hint of a womans face looks far better than the actual face of especially! the older woman. But their bottoms are done lovingly! 8)
Every now and then older pictures are found behind the visible ones, by other famous artists as well. Rembrandt comes to my mind. Check this out: http://news.yahoo.com/secret-painting-r ... 05531.html And Dürer, as you mention, who might well have hidden other scenes within the obvious ones.
It is quite possible that Dylan painted over an older picture, or corrected something he did not like with darker layers. There certainly seems to be an odd irregularity in the otherwise smoothly painted dark background.

Yes he did say something about a world that we can't see, and that is in some way more real than our idea of reality. And I do strongly believe that he is right.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri March 22nd, 2013, 01:33 GMT 

Joined: Sat September 17th, 2011, 01:08 GMT
Posts: 754
some of the subjects made me want to look away, but when i actually looked at them there are some interesting details (to me). peacemaker for example- there are little things that don't make sense. the cloak?, wings?,strange shadows around the woman in that painting? the backrounds seem to go through the people in some instances. i don't know enough about painting to say, "oh, backgrounds always look weird like that on the computer"(but i'm sure they sometimes do), or "gee, the guy just doesn't know how to draw shadows".

maybe, it's like you're saying and they just aren't technically accomplished, but considering his deep appreciation and knowledge of art, i think its likely that he got very close to what he set out to do. most likely... i don't know enough :idea: :lol:


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri March 22nd, 2013, 09:24 GMT 
Promethium Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue December 14th, 2010, 14:22 GMT
Posts: 43311
Location: Beneath the Southern X
^I think Peacemaker, like Poison in The Brazil Series, is a scene from a stage play, which would explain the costumes.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri March 22nd, 2013, 09:39 GMT 

Joined: Tue November 13th, 2012, 17:27 GMT
Posts: 1967
Location: Passing through
http://www.artdaily.com/index.asp?int_s ... _new=60598

Look at this picture. The background but also the dark parts are clearly painted in layers of colours which give it life and and depth. I am sure you could see faces or things appearing in there much as you will recognise forms in clouds. It took me some time to become aware of the two people talking in the background, but I am sure they are painted there consciously. Sometimes I see a penis in the arm of the left woman. I am not sure if it is painted there consciously... :? But once I see it, it does not go away and it disturbs the rest of the picture. One notices then that as an arm it looks odd, wooden and not really belonging to the rest of the woman. The question is now: Does Bob Dylan want us to think about penises when we see this goup of gospel singers? (Why not, after all the singers are bodies, and bodies come from and with penises! I could think that people come from the dark, via sex are cast into bodies, which sing the praise of the lord and then go out to either a brighter day or the fiery furnance shown in the light beyound the meeting room they are in.)

I am the type who looks at picture without thinking much. I dig it or not. And in this state of mind I say there is something wrong with that arm. I never did think about his songs too much, I just loved them. Some of the immaginery in them makes not really sense, but the really good ones are one perfect piece, nothing disturbs at all, and if one looks at them getting older and more in depth, they open up into this depth. This perfection is not achieved in the picture, which is utterly fine by me, I like it anyway.

Btw: there is a mens profile in the arm of the man to the right, where he touches the woman with the funny arm.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri March 22nd, 2013, 11:46 GMT 

Joined: Sat September 17th, 2011, 01:08 GMT
Posts: 754
Mutabor wrote:
I am the type who looks at picture without thinking much. I dig it or not.
i understand that, and probably that's the best way to experience it (especially with these paintings). sometimes, like in his songs, there is a line or something that i just keep thinking about. i think as long as i realize that there is no definitive "answer", then it's ok to ponder... it's bound to happen. i think it's when the view narrows to an attitude of "this is how it is", like critics sometimes do, it can be a problem. anyway, that's how i see it now, it might change :lol:.
Johanna Parker wrote:
^I think Peacemaker, like Poison in The Brazil Series, is a scene from a stage play, which would explain the costumes.
which play do you think johanna. did dylan say poison was based on a play- was it in the book they made for that series?


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri March 22nd, 2013, 11:59 GMT 
Promethium Member
User avatar

Joined: Tue December 14th, 2010, 14:22 GMT
Posts: 43311
Location: Beneath the Southern X
ifitwastruetennessee wrote:
Johanna Parker wrote:
^I think Peacemaker, like Poison in The Brazil Series, is a scene from a stage play, which would explain the costumes.
which play do you think johanna. did dylan say poison was based on a play- was it in the book they made for that series?


No idea which specific play either of them may be, and I'd have to look up what exactly Bob said about Poison, but I do seem to recall he said it was obviously a staged scene. They also talked about the background of that painting, which shows the arcs of the Roman Coliseum, though as usually Bob doesn't let on he knows much about that, saying he probably saw them in a picture somewhere. No matter what he can or cannot do in this field, I think he knows a great deal more than he admits. And yes, it's the interview in the Brazil Series book.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri March 22nd, 2013, 22:13 GMT 

Joined: Sat September 17th, 2011, 01:08 GMT
Posts: 754
thanks. yeah, his interviews are always interesting. i did get that rolling stone thing they put out recently, and i was surprised, because in some ways he sounds really pretty consistent through the years. maybe i should read it again :lol: anyway, sounds like the revisionist book you are getting is going to be fun/interesting to read.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat March 23rd, 2013, 16:53 GMT 

Joined: Tue November 13th, 2012, 17:27 GMT
Posts: 1967
Location: Passing through
ifitwastruetennessee wrote:
thanks. yeah, his interviews are always interesting. i did get that rolling stone thing they put out recently, and i was surprised, because in some ways he sounds really pretty consistent through the years. maybe i should read it again :lol: anyway, sounds like the revisionist book you are getting is going to be fun/interesting to read.


I've got the Rolling Stone book with the interviews, and I've seen a number of them on youtube. He is quite straigth forward in most of them (unless the interviewer pisses him off too much, that is), and he certainly is consistent about most things, Obviously hates to be grilled about his personal matters, which is understandable, and once he said that he gets weird when he does not really know what to answer. I feel that he is a very grounded person, and not at all a space case, which probably kept him alive and kicking to this age in spite of the madness he seems to stir up.

I've read an interview with him about (not just) his paintings on the Bobdylan website. Found it most interresting and am now totally convinced that his paintings belong not into museums, but into a bar or some such place, where one smokes, drinks a coffee and watches them just like one watches the people and the smoke rings. And just like the people they might have flaws, but a character of their own, and inspire thoughts. Very interresting also that he says in the interview that Norman Raeben wanted to teach him how to paint just the light, and the rest will fall into place. He thinks he never got there, but I found that actually the light in some of the New Orleans paintings is wonderful! Pity I never saw other paintings by him.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat March 23rd, 2013, 18:46 GMT 

Joined: Sat September 17th, 2011, 01:08 GMT
Posts: 754
thanks, i'll look for that interview. the new revisionist book has luc sante listed as an author. he has a book about new york, and he said something about being able to feel energy (might not be using the right word) of the past in the neighborhoods there. reminded me of what dylan said about walking in new orleans, and how so much of that is being lost in a lot of places.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sun March 24th, 2013, 04:41 GMT 
User avatar

Joined: Sat April 8th, 2006, 22:57 GMT
Posts: 2251
ifitwastruetennessee wrote:
some of the subjects made me want to look away, but when i actually looked at them there are some interesting details (to me). peacemaker for example- there are little things that don't make sense. the cloak?, wings?,strange shadows around the woman in that painting? the backrounds seem to go through the people in some instances. i don't know enough about painting to say, "oh, backgrounds always look weird like that on the computer"(but i'm sure they sometimes do), or "gee, the guy just doesn't know how to draw shadows".

maybe, it's like you're saying and they just aren't technically accomplished, but considering his deep appreciation and knowledge of art, i think its likely that he got very close to what he set out to do. most likely... i don't know enough :idea: :lol:


It did look like wings in that one. The idea that there are, (or could be) layers makes them more interesting! I keep seeing things in Rescue Team- I think that's the name of the one with the man carrying the woman. It would be nice to know the in person impression, as you said, v the photos.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Mon March 25th, 2013, 03:02 GMT 

Joined: Sat September 17th, 2011, 01:08 GMT
Posts: 754
belle laugh, you wrote something about the feeling in new orleans awhile back. i have never been there...maybe someday. mutabor said you can't see anything different standing in front of them... but even so, i'd like to see them.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Thu March 28th, 2013, 00:11 GMT 
User avatar

Joined: Sat April 8th, 2006, 22:57 GMT
Posts: 2251
ifitwastruetennessee wrote:
belle laugh, you wrote something about the feeling in new orleans awhile back. i have never been there...maybe someday. mutabor said you can't see anything different standing in front of them... but even so, i'd like to see them.


If you spend any time there, it leaves a lasting impression of that- Or at least it was that way before the storm battered it so badly. I think Bob may have seen, or got impressions from more than I did, though!

However, one time while walking in the French Quarter, a completely in the buff lady came flying through a doorway swinging on a swing! So, whoever was talking about maybe the paintings being scenes seen in a sequence, or like walking thru them, I think it would have been possible to see almost anything in some of the neighborhoods, even just passing by.

Also, I was thinking maybe the name of the collection related to New Orleans in the same way the street names there sometimes relate in opposite ways to the activities taking place on them.

And, if there are ghosts (in a way) in the paintings, that's just all kinds of related, and interesting.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 3rd, 2013, 15:04 GMT 
User avatar

Joined: Sun February 12th, 2006, 04:32 GMT
Posts: 2115
Still no book for the New Orleans series? Hopefully one will come along, I've enjoyed the previous ones and this looks like as interesting of collection as the Asia series.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Fri May 3rd, 2013, 19:27 GMT 
User avatar

Joined: Fri March 11th, 2005, 14:15 GMT
Posts: 598
Location: Albuquerque
The book has been available for about a month. There is a link on the main page.


Top
 Profile  
 
PostPosted: Sat May 4th, 2013, 06:57 GMT 

Joined: Tue November 13th, 2012, 17:27 GMT
Posts: 1967
Location: Passing through
I only find the link for the Revisionist Art one on the main page. No sign of a book about the New Orleans series there as far as I can see.


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 306 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13  Next

All times are UTC


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group