The Moon
- Thread starter pattycakes_
- Start date
william_kent
Well-known member
this one is called the "Gibbous Moon"
sufi
lala
i was contemplating recently about the pointlessness of photographing sunsets, like the whole value of a gorgeous sunset is based on it being ephemeral and too big to fit in your eyes, so having a photo not only fails to represent the full glory, but also devalues the whole basis for enjoying it.
maybe i'm overthinking somewhat but the same goes for the moon
maybe i'm overthinking somewhat but the same goes for the moon
william_kent
Well-known member
the name "Gibbous" is making me think of "Gibbon", another name for an ape, and that somehow I am wondering did I back the wrong side when @sufi posited the question "King Kong vs Cthulhu - who wins?"
I stupidly plumped for Cthulhu, but given the signs the Universe is sending, I'm the loser...
combined with Kenneth Grant's talk of The Ape being "the zoomorphic symbol of the mirror universe" which is connected with Atu 0 of the thoth tarot, a symbol which is explicitly referenced in the invitation to the occult ritual which will be performed in London next month..
look at the bottom of this image and marvel at how it resembles the "green man" ( of the "Spring Festival" ) that Crowley says is represented in ATU 0 of the ThothTarot ( a card explicitly associated with "The Ape" )
I stupidly plumped for Cthulhu, but given the signs the Universe is sending, I'm the loser...
combined with Kenneth Grant's talk of The Ape being "the zoomorphic symbol of the mirror universe" which is connected with Atu 0 of the thoth tarot, a symbol which is explicitly referenced in the invitation to the occult ritual which will be performed in London next month..
look at the bottom of this image and marvel at how it resembles the "green man" ( of the "Spring Festival" ) that Crowley says is represented in ATU 0 of the ThothTarot ( a card explicitly associated with "The Ape" )
sufi
lala
gibbous is every month isnt it
interestingly, due to the limited nature of nature photography, you won't find a picture of a moonlit gibbon (or not interestingly
)gibbons moon must be coming up tho
william_kent
Well-known member
IdleRich
IdleRich
Didn't some guy extend that argument to all representational art? It was one of those guys like the UNA Bomber who says we should return to a pre-technological society, one of his big things was saying that any painting of nature was a poor substitution for the real thing, in fact it was an insult to it.
IdleRich
IdleRich
I thank you
sufi
lala
I kind of agree but not so much when it comes to pioneering 19thC artists trying to capture the moment of a horse's gallop or a fine sunset or a nubile smirk or a millpond before photography made it all instant,
IdleRich
IdleRich
The thing is to me, nobody is saying that the pic is better or it could or should ever replace the actual pond or sunset - but that doesn't mean the art isn't worth pursuing. For one thing it would mean that painters were able to draw things they hadn't seen, or that hadn't happened, or even things that don't exist. I know that to some that is also a sacrilege but personally I don't think you can or should attempt to cap the imagination in that way.
Copying the real surely led to creating the unreal - stories, books and music and films quite possibly in the end. The argument (that this guy was making not you of course) seemed to be something like "A picture of a sunset will never match the reality, therefore we should throw away our paintings and paint, paintbrushes etc in fact we should throw away all the trappings of modern (not sure when we should go back to exactly) society and stand naked on hilltops looking at sunsets together" - although I may have simplified or misrepresented him slightly.
Never convinced by the idea that we should go back to some ideal utopian period in history. For starters any point we picked would seem quite arbitrary, but suppose we could uninvent the wheel or fire or farming, what's to stop some clever clogs inventing it again and leading us back to where we are now? Probably some kind of priest/police class brutally sacrificing anyone who blasphemes against the moon goddess by having ideas or thinking.
Copying the real surely led to creating the unreal - stories, books and music and films quite possibly in the end. The argument (that this guy was making not you of course) seemed to be something like "A picture of a sunset will never match the reality, therefore we should throw away our paintings and paint, paintbrushes etc in fact we should throw away all the trappings of modern (not sure when we should go back to exactly) society and stand naked on hilltops looking at sunsets together" - although I may have simplified or misrepresented him slightly.
Never convinced by the idea that we should go back to some ideal utopian period in history. For starters any point we picked would seem quite arbitrary, but suppose we could uninvent the wheel or fire or farming, what's to stop some clever clogs inventing it again and leading us back to where we are now? Probably some kind of priest/police class brutally sacrificing anyone who blasphemes against the moon goddess by having ideas or thinking.
sufi
lala
sure, but the creativity decreases exponentially as soon as photography is popularised,
that's not to say you can't be a creative photographer, but most aint
i don't think we need to get naked on a sunset hillside but it doesnt sound like a particularly bad plan still
IdleRich
IdleRich
sure, but the creativity decreases exponentially as soon as photography is popularised,
that's not to say you can't be a creative photographer, but most aint
i don't think we need to get naked on a sunset hillside but it doesnt sound like a particularly bad plan still
Well once you have photography it raises new questions and challenges, particularly for representative art. But even though most people didn't necessarily use photography creatively, ultimately it did create a load of new opportunities and ways to be creative. And it was also a necessary step on the way to making moving pictures.
woops
is not like other people
you can't have the good photographers without the bad ones sadly. though even the worst photographer will sometimes deliver, as @IdleRich recently showed.sure, but the creativity decreases exponentially as soon as photography is popularised,
that's not to say you can't be a creative photographer, but most aint
i don't think we need to get naked on a sunset hillside but it doesnt sound like a particularly bad plan still
IdleRich
IdleRich
Exactly! Er...
There's an interesting contradiction or something there I think in that supposing when someone invented the camera you got 100 photographers suddenly, and 99 were really just recording stuff but one did something creative. Then I think you can make a case that the world's overall level of creativity has gone up but proportionately it's gone down.
Basically they'll be loads more bad stuff and a bit more good stuff - and of course no old good stuff will vanish - so even while there is more good stuff than before it will feel as though creativity has gone down and it will seem as though we're in a period lacking in creativity.
Seems like a silly point but I reckon we're often at a point where new technology means loads of people are doing bad stuff but we shouldn't necessarily feel despondent about it
shakahislop
Well-known member
overrated