roger = surrealist?
Marc
Picasso's Guinica - spelt wrong but I dunno how its spelt] and it made me
think.. is roger a surrealist? The Final Cut certainly parallels that
painting by Picasso. And ATD seems to fit the ideal surrealists album?
Jeff A. Lovell
: in AP English in high school, we were discussing Surrealism [such as
: think.. is roger a surrealist? The Final Cut certainly parallels that
: painting by Picasso. And ATD seems to fit the ideal surrealists album?
Maybe, but more to the point, life = surrealism.
--
In a world without future, each parting of friends is a |Jeffrey A Lovell
death, each loneliness is final, each laugh is the last |
laugh. In a world without future, beyond the present |jal...@ilstu.edu
lies nothingness, and people cling to the present as if | Illinois State
hanging from a cliff. - Alan Lightman (Einstein's Dreams)| University
PGP Key fingerprint = 47 A1 D8 16 39 A4 79 BB 0B 3B 39 1B 5B C5 98 32
Marc
: : think.. is roger a surrealist? The Final Cut certainly parallels that
: Maybe, but more to the point, life = surrealism.
well, i would agree in many cases. but, i'm not sure if i want to debate
that. ;) i'm not versed on surrealism really, all i know is that roger
waters sings about the absurdity of human folly/war and it certainly
seems to be from a surrealists viewpoint.
Robert Lake
> in AP English in high school, we were discussing Surrealism [such as
> Picasso's Guinica - spelt wrong but I dunno how its spelt] and it made me
> painting by Picasso. And ATD seems to fit the ideal surrealists album?
Ummm, well I wouldn't really call Picasso a surrealist - cubist, yes.
Surrealism was about taking the familiar and showing it in an unfamiliar
way (such as Dali's melting watches). The philosphy (?) of the movement
was to show in art what dreams show us, with some notion of there being
a higher/greater truth in dreams, or at least a different perspective.
Much of Waters' work is about metaphor and allegory. There is little
that is surreal, IMHO, in TFC - it's pretty blunt and to the point -
but much that is metaphorical and allegorical.
But hey, I'm a scientist not an artist, and what would I know?
CU
R
Marc
: Ummm, well I wouldn't really call Picasso a surrealist - cubist, yes.
: Surrealism was about taking the familiar and showing it in an unfamiliar
: way (such as Dali's melting watches). The philosphy (?) of the movement
: was to show in art what dreams show us, with some notion of there being
: a higher/greater truth in dreams, or at least a different perspective.
: Much of Waters' work is about metaphor and allegory. There is little
: that is surreal, IMHO, in TFC - it's pretty blunt and to the point -
: but much that is metaphorical and allegorical.
well, i was given the definition that picasso was a surrealist thus i
came to the conclusion that waters was one too... sorry.
:)
Jeff A. Lovell
: Ummm, well I wouldn't really call Picasso a surrealist - cubist, yes.
Actually, Picasso was considered a cubist, but he didn't really
follow too closely to what most other cubists did. I just consider
Picasso an undefined art form that is abstract. More twords
nonconformity, in his sculpture "the guitar", he decided to use not mass.
but the absence of mass to make the sculpture. Anyway....
: Surrealism was about taking the familiar and showing it in an unfamiliar
: way (such as Dali's melting watches). The philosphy (?) of the movement
: was to show in art what dreams show us, with some notion of there being
: a higher/greater truth in dreams, or at least a different perspective.
To me, most of the surrealist movement was based upon
halicunations (sp). Look at some of Miro's stuff, I would hardly
consider any of the resembeling reality. Art cannot be defined, for it
is always changing. Surrealism is basically "above reality", which Roger
maybe considered. Surrealism isn't just an visual art form.
But hey, not to sound cliche, but to each his own. If you are
comfortable with thinking of Roger as a Surrealist, do so. It is what
you are willing to believe, not what others tell you it is.
: But hey, I'm a scientist not an artist, and what would I know?
We are all humans in the end, what do any of us know? Not much
more than what we have been told.
salv...@sasknet.sk.ca
>
>
> well, i would agree in many cases. but, i'm not sure if i want to debate
> that. ;) i'm not versed on surrealism really, all i know is that roger
> waters sings about the absurdity of human folly/war and it certainly
> seems to be from a surrealists viewpoint.
>
>
>>>>
______________________________________________________________
"How is it that music can, without words, evoke our laughter,
our tears, our highest aspirations?"
(Swan)
______________________________________________________________
Andrew Bennett
JAL> : Speak for yourself... :)
JAL> : That comment would apply to parrots,but I'd like to believe that
JAL> some of us at least can apply reason and logic...
JAL> And where did you learn how to reason? God tell you? The fact
Tricky one that... partly inbuilt I guess,but essentially you're right.
JAL> is we LEARN from what we see and what are told. We extrapolate from
JAL> there, thus producing "better" knowledge. There in lies my statement,
JAL> we don't know MUCH MORE than what we are told. Otherwise, the
JAL> caveman would have been WAY ahead of where he was.
Good point. You win. Off-topic argument terminated. :)
Andrew Bennett