42,0cm x 29,7cm
Graphite and gold leaf (24 C)
“The river goes where the current flows
The light we must destroy
Events conspire to set afire
The methods we employ”
– The Hat “The Angry River”
Das Bild hat Spannung in sich. Lass mich kurz erklären, was ich damit meine. Auf der linken Seite wirkt es auf mich märchenhaft verträumt, während die rechte Seite etwas drohendes hat, wie ein Gewitter das dabei ist aufzuziehen. Die Frau scheint zwischen beiden Welten zu stehen, während der Wolf eine Personifikation des herrannahenden Sturms/Gewitters zu sein scheint. Diese Spannung verleiht dem Bild etwas magisches, das mich in seinen Bann zieht. Die Goldstreifen sind noch ein zusätzliches Extra.
Das ist eine aufschlussreiche Interpretation, die ich sehr passend finden. Nur ein was: es handelt sich hier um einen Hund. Ändert das was, an deiner Betrachtung?
Im Grunde ist es mir egal, ob es ein Wolf oder ein Hund ist, ich habe nur Wolf benutzt, da Wölfe nicht domestiziert sind und daher mehr vom Sturmcharakter haben, aber für das Bild spielt das witzigerweise keine Rolle. Obwohl ich jetzt weiß, dass Du einen Hund gemalt hast, wirkt das Bild noch genauso auf mich wie vorher.
Das ist interessant. Wenn ich die ‘Sturm-Interpretation’ aufgreife, macht ein Wolf für mich auch mehr Sinn, aber nicht so, wie er hier dargestellt ist. Ein Wolf, der bereitwillig sich an die Seite eines Menschen gesellt, würde dem Bild noch einmal eine ganz andere Wendung geben, die ich aufregend finde.
Tun das Wölfe in Märchen nicht manchmal (oder hab ich da wieder was verwechselt?!)
Sure, in Märchen, aber dieses Bild hat nichts mit einem Märchen zu tun.
Das tut mir leid wenn Du dich jetzt auf den Schlips getreten fühlst, das war nicht meine Absicht. Ich hatte einfach das Gefühl vielleicht doch etwas missverstanden zu haben.
Keineswegs. Ich sehe bei einer Interpretation kein richtig oder falsch. Was man denkt und empfindet, wenn man etwas betrachtet, ist weit von derartiger Wertung entfernt. Schon alleine da durch, dass man die eigenen Erlebnisse nicht mit denen anderer vergleichen kann.
Wenn dich deine Gedanken in Richtung Märchen führen, dann ist das so, was dich, meiner Meinung nach, aber von diesem Bild wegführt. Märchen haben ganz andere Elemente, die man anders betrachten darf, da sie nicht von mir kommen und mich höchstens äußerlich beeinflussen können. Wenn ich ein Märchen illustriere oder etwas darstellen werde, das wiederum nur eine Interpretation meinerseits ist, dann tue ich gut daran, diese zu kennzeichnen.
Ich persönlich ziehe eine klare Grenze zwischen dem, was aus meinem Unterbewusstsein kommt und dem, was ich von außen aufgegriffen habe oder aufgreifen könnte. Beides ist zu weit entfernt, als dass es in direktem Kontakt stehen und man sie mit derselben Herangehensweise betrachten könnte.
Pingback: Of the Living and the Dead | The 13th
I see a distinction between the right part, which seems to be wild, chaotic, and the left part, which tend toward softness with slighter curves. The straight vertical lines underline the changing from one state to another, with the woman and dog as pivotal point.
At first I was tending to a lecture from right to left: the chaotic flow is pacified by the woman and the golden vertical lines act like filters (they really remind me polarizing filter: the light is normally chaotic, as it goes is every direction, but when you make it pass through a polarizing filter, all the light beams go in the same direction; or some of those noise filters used in the treatment of audio signals). Later I thought that it could actually be reversely read from left to right, with the softness becoming chaotic and the woman acting as a agent of disorder, the golden lines then could be showing the intensity of mess.
However I feel a lot more comfortable with my first impression.
The fire dog is a bit mysterious to me, as I don’t see the what the reference is. So far I read it through the usual symbolic of fire, maybe with a parallel to the phoenix. Same for the ring it has, remind me an areola somewhat, but that would be weird.
The title is also interesting: I suppose it brands the women, with a reference to the first of them following the abrahamic religions, but the way it is written, with points, suggest that it could be an acronym, but I’ve no idea of what it could be then.
So, with all those elements, the woman and the dog could represent some psychopomp figures, because the parallel with the phoenix I’ve made and the symbolic of fire related to death and passing of the soul; psychopomp are more often horses in our cultures, but it’s a jackal in Egyptian one, that’s more or less a dog and the phoenix is also Egyptian so that could fit (ok I admit that’s very far-fetched x)).
This psychopomp function could be taken literally, then right part would be the life, which is always a bit chaotic in essence, and after passing the figures we would enter the more quiet and peaceful after-life, whatever it is. The women and the dog are then shown processing the flow of life to convert it in an immortal form, but also less interesting, more flat.
It could be also taken from the point of view of Jungian psychology, where the psychopomp serves as an intermediary figure between the conscious and unconscious part. i’m really not an expert in this field so I can’t push a lot further this reading, but that could fit as well.
I have to rememeber your skill in analysing and symbolism. We have to talk about works of Old Masters, it would interests me, what you could tell.
Thanks a lot for your interpretation, I really appreciate that.
You are right with everything, but seems like, you are starting different than I did. Your conclusions are complete and correct – I’m a bit surprised about that. You are the second person, I know, which interpretes it so extensively and we didn’t talked about the meaning and process of my work before.
Your interpretation has a different starting point. I didn’t used symbolisazion deliberatly and come up with it later. At the first sight it seems unimportant, but the intention is the important basic of these works. Let me tell.
This work was a dream before, and I drew it like that and interpreted it. Some parts and symbols are deliberatly chosen, to display. For example the Aerole, the structures of “the river” and the polarizing filter (unfortunatly I didn’t thought about it really and only caught the sense behind it, but you nailed it.) The Aerole haven’t the same meaning and symbolisation like artwork of saints and ikonography, but borrowed. It should not represent the dog as heavenly, holy, chosen, divine or as an actual divinity, but as somehting that’s bigger than me.
The meaning with the phoenix is right, too. I interpreted these dreams of the burning dogs as kind of task, a continous way. Fire is a cleaning process, burning everything away, just to create a new free and fruitful place for new tasks and constructions of the self. Sometimes you have to empty the glass, before you can fill it. It has rebirth-character.
The woman is a bit more complexe, I think. You’re right, the name has a connection to genesis and means “life”. So yeah, the woman is the symbol for this big, extensive topic and the more extensive and important are her changes and meanings. About the acronym I won’t talk.
I like your interpretation as psychopomp figures, because the river felt/feels like the Styx – sometimes I wished it would be Lethe.
And it’s an accordance with your theories and my perceprions, especially the psychological interpretation. You catched the meaning of this work as I did!
I have to learn more about Carl Gustav Jung. I haven’t dealed with it yet.
I don’t think I’m especially skilled, it’s just that I take the time to watch and think, several days actually, added to some knowledge. In my opinion artworks are like wild animals, by rushing at them one can only have at best a glimpse on their meaning; it requires patience and a careful approach to get it more completely. In our modern word, people go through too much images every day and loose (or never acquire) the ability to spend time on one image and truly think about it. That doesn’t always work, sometime I really miss the meaning of an artwork x)
I’m happy I’ve managed to get the things right, I was afraid to miss completely the meaning, because I don’t know you and your Weltanschauung yet and that makes things way more difficult
The fact it’s a dream make the Jungian lecture even more interesting, because he worked a lot with dream interpretation, I should also learn more about his work.
About the woman, I haven’t really thought about the fact she’s faceless. Immediately that remind me drawings that were made by an anthropologist studying the native American: he never drew their faces, because they thought it would capture their soul. I have to think more about it.
I find the reference to the Styx and Inferno interesting, as it draw a link with the meaning of your name.
You gave me a lot of new elements here, I will have to meditate more on them.
Well, each interpretation is different and your interpretation fits well to my own. It’s the starting point, I think, the way you understand of what the content is a part. I like to hear, what other people see in my work, it opens a door and perspective, I can’t get on my own. But it is easy to talk past each other at the same time, when both have a completely different understanding of what it may come from, especially if it’s not clear, what art is used for by the creator.
So, I still would say, you are skilled by working with historical art or better said, you know a perspective and handle with these works like I do and like different people do, which I know from museums, which interpreted art at the same way.
I really have to get texts by Jung, as continuation of my dealing with Freud. It would extend my understanding of the subconscious and dreams.
I know this handling of the natives, too, like mirrors which have to be coverd in case of death. It’s interesting, especially by seeing the todays society: You are not existent, if you are not represent on photography or more worse: social media. Actually it doesn’t steal our soul, but our focus and understanding of living.
The explanation of her facelessness is more rational than mystic, but I’m interested in your thoughts.
Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:
You are commenting using your WordPress.com account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Google account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Twitter account.
( Log Out /
You are commenting using your Facebook account.
( Log Out /
Connecting to %s
Notify me of new comments via email.
Notify me of new posts via email.