Univeristy readings, thoughts and analysis

Week 1 Readings Interpretation

Questions:
 
1) If all signs / images follow the same destiny i.e. -thought or verbalisation and interpretation, that dose not create the same image as the "depicter visualized" as  surely the sign / image is only as good as the memory and interpretation of the "interpreter's" own past?
 

 
2) this therefor means the original "depiction" will be lost the more the image is described / interpreted creating further of the original image e say that an image is nothing more than memory, and just like with our own vision we fill in the blank spots with previous visions from our past?
 
 
3) If someone creates a piece if art and its meaning / message is perceived differently from how the depicter imagined, dose that mean that the piece dose not convey the artists thoughts properly or that the visualizer  should learn more about the piece before "filling" in the blanks / questions himself ?
 
if that is true then perhaps art is at fault and that it is the way that art is positioned (on a wall0 that is at fault and that a deeper setting / scenario is needed to fully emirs ones self in the message that the art is conveying.
 
 

Week two readings and interpretations

Questions:





 
 
Further analysis, perhaps typography, can only emote a word, and that the original history of the word is already present.
 
Typography in itself defines how we wish to represent something, and as a demonstration I have attached some typography videos from famous movies, and al;though only further evoking sounds the images do there jobs perfectly
 
Typography links: (be warned graphic words).
 
 
 
 




' ; // get html // ======== var _html = _response; // normalize // ========= _html = _html.replace(/<\s+/gi, '<'); _html = _html.replace(/\s+>/gi, '>'); _html = _html.replace(/\s+\/>/gi, '/>'); // remove // ====== _html = _html.replace(/

No comments:

Post a Comment