Andrew commented to yesterday's post:
This existence thing is interesting, is it not, when you start paying attention and try to stop using the shorthand of labels?
The first thought that comes to mind: it is what it is, not what you think it is.
To expand my response:
In freehand drawing class, we learned to draw what we saw, not what we thought we saw. With familiar objects, it's easy to see things that aren't really there, or to see them as they don't really appear.
The exercises that helped me most were drawing shoes and chairs. Afternoons and pages went into it. It's not a skill I use frequently, but the knowledge always seems fresh. (That's odd.)
There are people who claim they can't draw. I wonder if the real difficulty is that they can't see?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Or is it not so much that they can't see as that they accept a shorthand, labeled form of seeing as the real thing?
I like this a lot.
I consider a drawing class I took several years ago to be my first formal training in mindfulness. It took me literally weeks and weeks just to learn to see what was in front of me, and to perceive the difference between what I saw and what I thought.
but the beauty of art is that it is different. whats the point of art if it all looks the same?
I don't understand.
I guess this is one of those posts where having the experience helps. Gold star for you, Greenfrog!
Kathy, I'm proposing that there's a certain level of mastery that allows one to just play. Art, music, language, whatever.
Andrew, I think I understand - and yes, part of the not-seeing problem is accepting whatever's handed over. The labels are no more the object than the catalog number is the music.
Post a Comment