Hilla Lilla & Hildebrandr 2
Hilla Lilla & Hildibrandr 2
My gaze so piercing
Into tower history
Through window too big
Standing paired these two
For a thousand years alone
And me I fly by
A bird in the storm
A crowing a cawing a
Shadow in shadows
My questions arise
What she may smell like to him
And where her mind rests
The glowing forehead
Seeking way out for way out
From deathly cold stone
Looks towards future
With eyes so deeply shut down
Sinks into farewell
Once spellbound in the picture
As I am today viewer
Flying past in an instant
Translated with the help of DeepL (free version)
Hilla Lilla & Hildibrandr 2
Mein Blick so schneidend
Ein viel zu großes Fenster
Im Turm Geschichte
Stehen die beiden
Schon seit eintausend Jahren
Und ich flieg vorbei
Ein Vogel im Sturm
Ein Krähen ein Krächzen ein
Schatten im Schatten
Mein Fragen erwacht
Wonach sie ihm wohl duftet
Und woran sie denkt
Die glühende Stirn
Ersucht Ausweg um Ausweg
Vom todkalten Stein
Schaut Richtung Zukunft
Mit geschlossenen Augen
Versinkt im Lebwohl
Gebannt einst im Bild
Wie ich heute Betrachter
Vorbeiflug im Nu
Sehr schön. Sauber. Hat mir sehr gefallen.
0.00 SBD,
0.04 STEEM,
0.04 SP
Mir scheint, "Bildbegehung" ist ein ständiger Wechsel.
Zwischen Psychographie und dem Verfolgen von Ideen.
I think "picture walking" is something like perpetual change between psychography and following ideas.
0.00 SBD,
0.16 STEEM,
0.16 SP
When using an artist's painting, there is a subjacent story to interpret. Of course we can totally subvert the theme, which is what I usually do, however, only in the case of a totally abstract painting, would I go into random psychographic writing. If there is a story in the picture, it's usually a good symbolic depart to the building of a written scene.
0.00 SBD,
0.18 STEEM,
0.18 SP
Is there anything like that?
Or is it nevertheless possible to see something since I am trained to see something?
Let's think of Malevich's "Black Sqare", for example.
Maybe the artist intended me to see nothing, i.e. the absence of God and of Saints.
But can I not see something black like a Holy Bible or like the glance into a tunnel of a coal mine?
0.00 SBD,
0.01 STEEM,
0.01 SP
I don't believe the artist's intentions to be consequential. What matters is the reader and the images conjured up in his mind by the symbolic. It really doesn't matter if the interpretation is born out of personal experience or training, or out of what Jung called the collective unconscious. Wether the source is interior as based in personal experience, or exterior, through some Godly or Morphogenetic Field channel that I can perceive but not assure, symbols awake in us the recognition of meaning and, to describe this output is not the same as chaotically throw words into a page, expecting it to form meaning.
Interpretation belogs to the reader, not the author.
0.00 SBD,
0.03 STEEM,
0.03 SP
This credo seems too simple to me.
We don't need a theory of art in daily life, but we cannot avoid from having theorems and presumptions. To give them a form, a Gestalt, in order to communicate them, must not be intermingled with constructing theories.
Thus I'm inclined to say:
Interpretation belongs nor to the reader nor to the author but to both in some sense. Interpretation is not a possession but a communication process, and as such never finishable.
0.00 SBD,
0.01 STEEM,
0.01 SP
You can see it that way, but the "filter" matters, and I don't see a piece of literary creation as a dialogue. It most certainly is a monologue with manyfold interpretations, just as a piece of art is. Now: when you talk about the body of work of an author, that becomes an entirely different issue.
I don't think it's arbitrary.
Nevertheless it IS.
This is exactly what I deny.
Not understood - no interpretation from my side...
To interprete and being interpreted is not only the main thin in communication but in all subject-object-relations. We interprete some parts of 'nature' as something, and 'nature' does the same with mankind.
'Art' is part of 'nature', believe it or not. To encounter a piece of art means to be interpreted by that piece. You can best learn it in music, and I do not speak of Pop: Beethoven interpretes me, and Ligeti does in another way.
0.00 SBD,
0.01 STEEM,
0.01 SP
@ty-ty... I try to go through life eliminating the excess in things. This includes the excess in my credos. The simpler, the leaner, the cleaner, the better.
I'm not looking for followers. And, though, at first sight that "credo", as you call it, may look simplistic, I can assure you it is not. You just have to think a little bit about the implications to realize the depth of perception it implies.
El gesto de los enamorados es sugerente. Él cruza sus brazos con deseos de atraparla, mientras tanto, ella trata de huir del lugar, pues él es mucha tentación. Tu poema también refleja esa pasión. Me encantó leerte.
0.00 SBD,
0.04 STEEM,
0.04 SP
https://suno.com/song/c631eb2c-8ca9-45e1-b248-1ba7130c641a <- naja .
https://suno.com/song/559d2282-90e2-498a-8334-78b7a635a226 <- aha .
https://suno.com/song/8511c9f7-6dfd-4fba-b949-34a05c680df2 <- hihi .
https://suno.com/song/0427912e-8b8c-49e6-8927-aae7f63c4b19 <-na .
https://suno.com/song/3002ebd2-72fc-4a44-ae21-af5168a09e7b <- höhö .
https://suno.com/song/4fc0f756-dc25-4d17-b42e-2d12d125f5bf <- sauber , ja .
https://suno.com/song/666155dc-a815-49b5-8261-e365290fcc04 <- doof ?
Das ist schon erstaunlich , was für schöne Songtexte Du erzeugst , ja .
0.00 SBD,
0.03 STEEM,
0.03 SP
You made my day!
;-))