Comments on: Portrait http://manuelmarino.com/portrait/ Mon, 06 Feb 2012 11:20:37 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: CG Walters http://manuelmarino.com/portrait/comment-page-1/#comment-337 CG Walters Sat, 15 Dec 2007 20:35:11 +0000 http://manuelmarino.com/portrait/#comment-337 A very nice piece of work. Thank you, CG A very nice piece of work.
Thank you,
CG

]]> By: Robert Karl Stonjek http://manuelmarino.com/portrait/comment-page-1/#comment-332 Robert Karl Stonjek Sat, 15 Dec 2007 11:37:52 +0000 http://manuelmarino.com/portrait/#comment-332 The idea of my piece is that one can capture the footprint of the unseeable by looking at the impression it makes. Humans live in their environment and can't help but to interact with it. A tracker looks at the ground and sees the impression made by a passing animal. The question is - what is the essence of this interaction and can it be captured? It would have been equally true but not mentioned in the piece, that the impression of the bushland should have been found on the individual. Let's face it, we are what we eat - if the molecules were big enough to see then we would see humans made up of a collage of cows and other animals, fruits and vegetables. That is what we eat and we are the result of that eating - what we inherit from parents barely fills a teaspoon ie you are a teaspoon of inheritance and the rest you ate at some time or other. The portrait is the opposite of Dorian Gray - the bush is forever as young or as old as it ever has been and as it ever will be, but we age. Robert The idea of my piece is that one can capture the footprint of the unseeable by looking at the impression it makes. Humans live in their environment and can’t help but to interact with it. A tracker looks at the ground and sees the impression made by a passing animal.

The question is – what is the essence of this interaction and can it be captured? It would have been equally true but not mentioned in the piece, that the impression of the bushland should have been found on the individual. Let’s face it, we are what we eat – if the molecules were big enough to see then we would see humans made up of a collage of cows and other animals, fruits and vegetables. That is what we eat and we are the result of that eating – what we inherit from parents barely fills a teaspoon ie you are a teaspoon of inheritance and the rest you ate at some time or other.

The portrait is the opposite of Dorian Gray – the bush is forever as young or as old as it ever has been and as it ever will be, but we age.

Robert

]]> By: Taran Rampersad http://manuelmarino.com/portrait/comment-page-1/#comment-319 Taran Rampersad Fri, 14 Dec 2007 05:14:24 +0000 http://manuelmarino.com/portrait/#comment-319 Perhaps it is because it is fresh in my mind, but this seems like a more positive version of 'The Portrait of Dorian Gray', by Oscar Wilde. In the book, Dorian Gray pays someone to make a portrait - and whatever Dorian Gray does, his soul pays the price - the portrait, over time, becomes uglier and uglier while he remains the same. At the end, he dies - and the face of the portrait is what lays on the ground, leaving the Dorian Gray portrait looking as he did before he died. Thought provoking. <img src='http://manuelmarino.com/wp-includes/images/smilies/1.gif' alt=':)' class='wp-smiley' /> Perhaps it is because it is fresh in my mind, but this seems like a more positive version of ‘The Portrait of Dorian Gray’, by Oscar Wilde. In the book, Dorian Gray pays someone to make a portrait – and whatever Dorian Gray does, his soul pays the price – the portrait, over time, becomes uglier and uglier while he remains the same. At the end, he dies – and the face of the portrait is what lays on the ground, leaving the Dorian Gray portrait looking as he did before he died.

Thought provoking. :)

]]>