Interpret this art round 2

[mauvais]

The dog is a synonym for what might yet be, the archetypal future of the self. It finds itself entombed in the hexagon of its own mortality, the green ellipse counterbalancing the horrific futility of red, conveying the emotion of the power struggle omnipresent throughout 1980s Latvia. This scene is a classical yet flawed cry for help - the artist makes a call to all of us, and in doing so encapsulates the very essence of now, now, right now, a time by which too much has already been discarded. In contextualizing this emotion I, having become a conduit through which my own modernist ambivalence towards these failings can be expressed, am late for the bus again. Bye.

 

[Paul Russell]

It's a dog at Crufts (the red carpet represents the pageantry/show of it all) and he's moving around and all cross and rabid, because he'd rather be chasing waves on Worthing beach (pictured in the background).

The cars represent the interminable journey from Worthing to Earls Court, or wherever, in London.

And the green circle is, erm...

Or the dog is the artist and the whole thing represents his rage at convention and his yearning for the simple life.

 

[WouldBe]

If it needs a 200 word essay to explain it is it really art? Like having to explain a joke.

 

[Gromit]

If it needs a 200 word essay to explain it is it really art? Like having to explain a joke.

I don't get it.

 

[Firky]

Hmm, it is one of three and is taken from a Muybridge photograph of a dog in motion. That's Monte Carlo in the background.


Anyway if you want to be uber geeky about it open your tartan flasks of weak lemon tea and read this:

http://sab.sscc.ru/imacs2005/papers/T4-I-88-1020.pdf

 

[Stanley Edwards]

...

http://sab.sscc.ru/imacs2005/papers/T4-I-88-1020.pdf

Nah. I ain't gonna read that.


Oh. Maybe.

*clicked*

e2a; Two lines in lost me. Load of crap that one

 

[Paul Russell]

Hmm, I notice they use phrases like "mildly higher" about Fig. 3 without presenting statistical tests, p values, or anything vaguely appropriate. Poor show, really.

Nah, that's Worthing, not Monte Carlo.

Hmm, it is one of three and is taken from a Muybridge photograph of a dog in motion. That's Monte Carlo in the background.


Anyway if you want to be uber geeky about it open your tartan flasks of weak lemon tea and read this:

http://sab.sscc.ru/imacs2005/papers/T4-I-88-1020.pdf

 

[Stanley Edwards]

Nah, that's Worthing, not Monte Carlo.

Malaga. Definitely Malaga. Dead, squashed dogs stay on the roads for months in Malaga. I've considered making macho mens handbags out of them (a thought that leads me to another thread )

P.S. No one has done your style of street photography here in Granada that I know of. Rich pickings! Free accommodation on offer if you can get a few days off work and a Monarch/RyanAir.

 

[Paul Russell]

Thanks Stanley.

If ever I get a few pence to rub together (received tax demand thing-y yesterday that I can't pay) I may take you up on that.

P.S. No one has done your style of street photography here in Granada that I know of. Rich pickings! Free accommodation on offer if you can get a few days off work and a Monarch/RyanAir.

 

[weltweit]

Looks to me like a lot of blank canvas, just half of the picture occupied by a red framing inside which a dog is having fun chasing its tail.

Perhaps it is trying to lick its *ollocks I am not sure but it is blurred so I think it is chasing its tail.

Overall the image does very little for me perhaps it would be better in life size but I doubt it.

Sorry I cannot be more flowery but that is what I see.