|Baphomet illustration by Eliphas Levi|
e) See : References The Mad Hatter's Tea Party for Alice In Wonderland (1865) by John Tenniel?
f) See: References "The Agony in the Garden of Gethsemane " (1590s) by El Greco?
g) See also: The Mad Hatter's Tea Party for Alice In Wonderland (published 1865) by John Tenniel references "The Agony in the Garden of Gethsemane " (1590s) by El Greco?
h) See also: "The Mad Hatter's Tea Party: for Alice In Wonderland (published 1865) by John Tenniel references Baphomet, in Dogme et Rituel de la Haute Magie, (1856) by Eliphas Levi ?
i) See: Referenced in supposed "Mayan" artifact showing contact with extra terrestrials, Side B
Your postings about Giger are original and refreshing. They always give me something to think about. In this case, I think it's an example of Giger never really getting the in-detail examination he deserved. I think people were almost put off by the originality of his work, and just looked at it and said, "Another of Giger's weird things." As you have shown repeatedly, Giger was an influenced and showed the imprint of those influences as any other major artist would. (One of the elements of art being evidence of knowledge of and appreciation for what has come before in the particular field of art.) Fascinating stuff, need to read it again now.ReplyDelete
Well, I suppose very little has been done to take a close look at Giger's work and the way the ideas were coming to him, but although perhaps the people who knew him well and talked a lot about his work with him might have something to say about all this just can't really put their mind to it unless there's someone who's going to film them in a documentary or put their words in a decent magazine. But then I should say that it hasn't been that immediate with Dali's work either, but people are finding ways to work establish patterns and work it out very creatively. But there might be the whole thing that his paintings should be experienced by people in their own way rather than being forced to interpret them in one way or another by any single person. There I am assuming that I've caught the drift of what was going on in his paintings whether he was wholly conscious of it or not and no one seems to be out there to tell me. Maybe it shouldn't be so hard to work out what is going on. Giger obviously liked to play with ideas from outside and often in an interesting abstract way. Then it seems that Giger has talked a lot about his art and ideas and got fed up with saying the same old thing over and over again in interviews where they kept asking the same old questions and by the looks of it very little of what he said got to the public. So perhaps my explorations into his artwork almost seem to come out of an imagined conversation with Giger and it's up to me to faithfully map out my flow of thoughts and when someone else comes to give me a piece of information or at least a clue, make sure that they are being acknowledged as part of the conversation. A lot of the associations that I'm making come up in realisations almost like the detective in the TV series Pysch when he sees something, his mind highlights it and then his subconscious seems to spew out information about what has taken place and then he falsely sells his abilities to the police as a psychic. And perhaps in that way I am learning to trust the value of my own flow of thoughts popping up from the subconscious.ReplyDelete
So now I've divided the contents of this page into different pages linked from here.ReplyDelete