Okay I have had time to reflect on the art I'd like to see in person. On my recent #RoadtripUSA I made a random stopover at an architectural urban experiment community called Arcosanti (began in the 70s by artist/architect Paolo Soleri). It was really a reminder of how pleasant when the architecture of a space is very thought out and intentional (much like the previously discussed Guggenheim Museum by FLW); and a reminder of how much I enjoy experiencing those kind of spaces. So I would like to see more REAL architecture in person. To list a few architects who's work I'd LOVE to experience in person: Mies van der Rohe, Luis Barragan, Oscar Niemeyer, and SANAA. I really wish we as a society could bring back the World's Fair because those were truly such an architectural opportunity.
But I also really want to get into more ancient historic and vernacular architecture in person; experiencing buildings that worked BEFORE we became so deeply reliant on technology for comfort.
I'm with @India in that the art I'm most interested in seeing in person is architecture. Photographs really aren't a good substitute for something that is supposed to be a whole atmosphere. Niemeyer is definitely on my list, as is Lina Bo Bardi. I did a little Barragan pilgrimage in Mexico City and it's probably one of the best things I've ever extended myself to do (involved more than one occasion of pretending to understand Spanish). I also really want to go see some Horace Gifford houses on Fire Island (very woody, geometric, rough but clean), I think there are some which you can rent. Which is one thing I will say about SEEing good architecture is that so often you don't get the chance to really experience a place for long enough or in enough solitude, and it always leaves me with a little bit of longing. But so do photos. Some buildings I've seen that were much more fulfilling in person:
- FLW's Pope-Leighy House in VA
- Russell Wright's Manitoga
- Phillip Johnson's Glass House
- Juan O'Gorman at UNAM in Mexico City
Ok sorry, I could go on, but stopping myself bc this feels like a who's who of white men architects.
But here's one that hurts that will never be possible:
- Phillis Wheatley school building in New Orleans (demolished in 2011)
- (and actually lots of mid-century buildings that people don't deem "historic" enough to save)
Everything is energy. There’s nothing that is not energy.
Auras in art immediately took me back to your piece that included Jan van Eyck. Early Renaissance period interests me because the time represented return to the qualitative approach to art.
So called ancient “man” built Stonehenge. Stones weighing 25-30 tons, imported from hundreds of miles away, erected side by side. If that wasn’t enough, they laid one equal weight and measure across the top. And every spring equinox the sun rises through the center of the space created by the monument. This is what scientists and archeologists refer to as “ancient man”. To prehistoric people there was no distinction between left and right brain preference.
The fact of the matter is that prehistoric people actually walked and communicated with spirits and deities depicted in hieroglyphs and cave drawings. The people existing before so called recorded history were very aware of sacred power spots and energy vortexes. The keys to this are found in the hieroglyphs that depict pharaohs and priests holding amulets and pendulums. These instruments were used to detect and manipulate subtle energy.
At some point in time in prerecorded history there was a shift of consciousness. The door between right and left brain consciousness closed and humanity became predominantly left brain.
The gods who once walked the earth in physical form retreated to realms of more subtle dimensions and stopped direct communication. By the time Pythagoras arrived In Egypt the days of gods on earth had long passed. I feel that Pythagoras was definitely sensitive to residual spirit energy lingering in the realm. That’s where Pythagoras’ monochord transformed the arts and people’s perception and expectations of what art’s inherent potential. This is the beginning of the qualitative approach to art and science.
A few centuries later France and Germany, where dousing with rods and pendulums was revived, ushered in the renaissance to “old school” technology that had been forced underground. Back then people wanted to build monuments on natural sacred power spots. They hired dousers to detect where the “good energy” exists. Scientists in France developed a system by which every substance in the world could be categorized in boxes of 7 colors. The Germans were interested in finding causes and cures for cancer. It was the farmers who realized that vertical waves emanating from underground caused abnormal growth in both livestock and vegetables. These were both qualitative approaches. But the science of detection was very necessary in the path back to subtle energy.
Architects having a profound respect for the history of building and design took the wave theory and started to implement designs that negated negative energy. There are obviously other “old world” places that retained knowledge of art and science that makes use of not only technical proficiency in art but also the aspect of art that. This is the implementation of the wave approach, the interaction with and application of subtle energy in art and science.
van Eyck is not only a master of technique his work is also infused with that intangible essence, there is life force that draws one into the subtle dimensions that are subtlety and masterfully embedded into his pieces.
Auras too are depicted in religious paintings. Most of the Christian Saints are painted with gold around their heads. The beauty here is that one cannot fake spirituality. It’s either there, in the(ir) work, or it’s not.
There is no question that your aura is violet, because the visionary jumped OUT!!! Benjamin's theory is fascinating to me and I would like to explore it further. I would also like to explore the idea of auras in general, and I WILL be taking an aura quiz soon. Please send me the link for the ones you took via text.
Once again feeling blessed to be part of the See Level community, and to be receiving such great art recommendations. I had no idea about the renovations happening at the National Gallery, but now that I do I am going to have to hop on the metro and check out Sarah Cain's work. Also going to listen to that episode of WTF because I love LDC and Brad and also TEA.
I am going to second the Made You Look recommendation. What a fascinating and infuriating documentary that was. It grabbed me within the first 30 seconds, and it remained engaging for the entire run time. Ann Freedman is a charlatan and a villain and it is insane to me that she still has a career in art. It was also very interesting to learn about the Chinese tradition of art duplication. I would have never known about that otherwise, so thanks Made You Look. Lastly, I will say this: Michael Hammer...
For this week's question: There is a lot of art that I would love to see in person, but the artist that comes to me off the top of the dome is of course my main man Kandinsky. I would be thrilled to see any of his work but especially Composition 8 and Yellow-Red-Blue.
Okay I have had time to reflect on the art I'd like to see in person. On my recent #RoadtripUSA I made a random stopover at an architectural urban experiment community called Arcosanti (began in the 70s by artist/architect Paolo Soleri). It was really a reminder of how pleasant when the architecture of a space is very thought out and intentional (much like the previously discussed Guggenheim Museum by FLW); and a reminder of how much I enjoy experiencing those kind of spaces. So I would like to see more REAL architecture in person. To list a few architects who's work I'd LOVE to experience in person: Mies van der Rohe, Luis Barragan, Oscar Niemeyer, and SANAA. I really wish we as a society could bring back the World's Fair because those were truly such an architectural opportunity.
But I also really want to get into more ancient historic and vernacular architecture in person; experiencing buildings that worked BEFORE we became so deeply reliant on technology for comfort.
(But can we get a link to the aura test? While I ponder my answer to the week's question and general reflections on this week's superb art recon.)
I'm with @India in that the art I'm most interested in seeing in person is architecture. Photographs really aren't a good substitute for something that is supposed to be a whole atmosphere. Niemeyer is definitely on my list, as is Lina Bo Bardi. I did a little Barragan pilgrimage in Mexico City and it's probably one of the best things I've ever extended myself to do (involved more than one occasion of pretending to understand Spanish). I also really want to go see some Horace Gifford houses on Fire Island (very woody, geometric, rough but clean), I think there are some which you can rent. Which is one thing I will say about SEEing good architecture is that so often you don't get the chance to really experience a place for long enough or in enough solitude, and it always leaves me with a little bit of longing. But so do photos. Some buildings I've seen that were much more fulfilling in person:
- FLW's Pope-Leighy House in VA
- Russell Wright's Manitoga
- Phillip Johnson's Glass House
- Juan O'Gorman at UNAM in Mexico City
Ok sorry, I could go on, but stopping myself bc this feels like a who's who of white men architects.
But here's one that hurts that will never be possible:
- Phillis Wheatley school building in New Orleans (demolished in 2011)
- (and actually lots of mid-century buildings that people don't deem "historic" enough to save)
Also I feel like this can all be connected to and discussed in reference to NFTs, but don't have articulated thoughts on that quite yet
Everything is energy. There’s nothing that is not energy.
Auras in art immediately took me back to your piece that included Jan van Eyck. Early Renaissance period interests me because the time represented return to the qualitative approach to art.
So called ancient “man” built Stonehenge. Stones weighing 25-30 tons, imported from hundreds of miles away, erected side by side. If that wasn’t enough, they laid one equal weight and measure across the top. And every spring equinox the sun rises through the center of the space created by the monument. This is what scientists and archeologists refer to as “ancient man”. To prehistoric people there was no distinction between left and right brain preference.
The fact of the matter is that prehistoric people actually walked and communicated with spirits and deities depicted in hieroglyphs and cave drawings. The people existing before so called recorded history were very aware of sacred power spots and energy vortexes. The keys to this are found in the hieroglyphs that depict pharaohs and priests holding amulets and pendulums. These instruments were used to detect and manipulate subtle energy.
At some point in time in prerecorded history there was a shift of consciousness. The door between right and left brain consciousness closed and humanity became predominantly left brain.
The gods who once walked the earth in physical form retreated to realms of more subtle dimensions and stopped direct communication. By the time Pythagoras arrived In Egypt the days of gods on earth had long passed. I feel that Pythagoras was definitely sensitive to residual spirit energy lingering in the realm. That’s where Pythagoras’ monochord transformed the arts and people’s perception and expectations of what art’s inherent potential. This is the beginning of the qualitative approach to art and science.
A few centuries later France and Germany, where dousing with rods and pendulums was revived, ushered in the renaissance to “old school” technology that had been forced underground. Back then people wanted to build monuments on natural sacred power spots. They hired dousers to detect where the “good energy” exists. Scientists in France developed a system by which every substance in the world could be categorized in boxes of 7 colors. The Germans were interested in finding causes and cures for cancer. It was the farmers who realized that vertical waves emanating from underground caused abnormal growth in both livestock and vegetables. These were both qualitative approaches. But the science of detection was very necessary in the path back to subtle energy.
Architects having a profound respect for the history of building and design took the wave theory and started to implement designs that negated negative energy. There are obviously other “old world” places that retained knowledge of art and science that makes use of not only technical proficiency in art but also the aspect of art that. This is the implementation of the wave approach, the interaction with and application of subtle energy in art and science.
van Eyck is not only a master of technique his work is also infused with that intangible essence, there is life force that draws one into the subtle dimensions that are subtlety and masterfully embedded into his pieces.
Auras too are depicted in religious paintings. Most of the Christian Saints are painted with gold around their heads. The beauty here is that one cannot fake spirituality. It’s either there, in the(ir) work, or it’s not.
Thank you See Level.
ps- the kitty in Sarah's studio is giving me Caroline realness.
There is no question that your aura is violet, because the visionary jumped OUT!!! Benjamin's theory is fascinating to me and I would like to explore it further. I would also like to explore the idea of auras in general, and I WILL be taking an aura quiz soon. Please send me the link for the ones you took via text.
Once again feeling blessed to be part of the See Level community, and to be receiving such great art recommendations. I had no idea about the renovations happening at the National Gallery, but now that I do I am going to have to hop on the metro and check out Sarah Cain's work. Also going to listen to that episode of WTF because I love LDC and Brad and also TEA.
I am going to second the Made You Look recommendation. What a fascinating and infuriating documentary that was. It grabbed me within the first 30 seconds, and it remained engaging for the entire run time. Ann Freedman is a charlatan and a villain and it is insane to me that she still has a career in art. It was also very interesting to learn about the Chinese tradition of art duplication. I would have never known about that otherwise, so thanks Made You Look. Lastly, I will say this: Michael Hammer...
For this week's question: There is a lot of art that I would love to see in person, but the artist that comes to me off the top of the dome is of course my main man Kandinsky. I would be thrilled to see any of his work but especially Composition 8 and Yellow-Red-Blue.