immediately i begin to interpret the phrase to mean something beyond its title, the hour is an enigma when viewed without light or frame of reference, it can be morning or night his thought sends me down one of two avenues:
1) the enigma is in placing an every day item without a frame of reference. a chair can be the furniture of dolls if there is no frame of reference by which to determine its scale. our world could in fact be both minute or enormous when compared to other worlds but without that frame of reference we live in a perpetual state of illusion as to its size. alternatively the significance of a moment, thought or gesture is not known until its consequence is clear, therefore meaning that we live without any true indication of the value of the second in which we live - this perhaps is the true enigma of the hour.
alternatively
2) it is not the moment which is the enigma, but the way in which we experience it. is it possible that what we like and dislike is different not because we are but because we use the same vocabulary to describe things which we in fact experience as being entirely different - in simple terms could black be white to different eyes but still described by the same token value. This is a nearly impossible thought, to perceive the world as another perceives it. This perhaps leads closer to the nature of art itself, the concept of beauty being relative to its beholder, a painting loved by one but not by another - because the es is different? the painting? the person?
No comments:
Post a Comment