Whose Dream If

Is it possible to have another person's dream? Can groups, none local to each other, share in a dream? The experts are convinced each question holds... more

by Terrance DePietro

Title

Whose Dream If

Artist

Terrance DePietro

Medium

Drawing - Charcoal

Description

Is it possible to have another person's dream? Can groups, none local to each other, share in a dream? The experts are convinced each question holds truth.

Only when we associate the newly arrived images to those 'seemingly' similar of the past, might we mistake or overlook the nuances that original event presents us. By 1988, after several years of adopting, practicing and cultivating the process of accepting 'what arrives' spontaneously, it could be said that familiarity had tamed any associated doubts of its validity.

Of course the active role of reeducating, adding knowledge and in someways understanding, into the process, is what most secured the mind; allowed the questions to move beyond personal, find the consequences of the collective implications and reconcile that the images were more societal than mere to personal. That is much overlooked today; that 'image' [as dreams] are 'shared'.

In a forum of tens of thousands of creative individuals, one does not have to stretch imagination to find how 'similar' are the "Motifs"...In fact, the prevalence is so common that many associate the familiar to 'mimicry'. And though that could be a truth, in some cases, it would not explain the extensive periphery of imagery, of remotely obscure motifs, oozing into reality at the same time.

Many will never believe that the presented image, spontaneously configures itself, most rapidly, and with 'zero' forethought, model or example. The same was true for the Comstock Series [the mythical pen and ink drawings of '87] and the Noetics Series [figurative, anima, drawings of '84-'85].

And without reserve, extending to present day, it is my preferred technical process - to approach and cultivate forms that spontaneously present themselves on the matrix, without prior thought, design or intention.

Even if the 'motifs' that arrive show familiarity to prior ordained myths, tales or legends, they are ever different and removed - even to the imply of the motifs! Paradoxical as it seems, the old semblances dissolve when it is recognized that the old associations are dead and buried; that the forms [in semblance] are energized in completely new terms. How to interpret; when there is no 'ordained' lexicon for the vocabulary?

In a way the problem is age old; civilization's choice of 'linguistics' as primary pathway of communication, over a 'language of image/form'. A necessary option in that, linguistics allows precision; whereas, spontaneous image is subjective of imply and holds reliance on Intuition and one's unique and sole 'pre-disposition to form'.

Without such precision, a 'shared understanding' could not have preserved a vocabulary or lexicon beyond a mere circumstantial duration - a price we pay today, that we under-esteem intuition and the role of 'feeling our pre-dispositional knowledge' (not merely shared knowledge; add ethics, morality, et al).

If one is able to accept a hefty measure of intuition; feel their pre-disposed attractedness; add measure of imagination [sans fantasy], to a dash of knowledge and perseverance, they can build a personal vocabulary - and adopt it to the social jargon. The more one learns - then, once more, understands - the more secure they become in their demarche.

If only all the 'independently disposed' artists could come together about the 'purposiveness' of what we do...perhaps society would remember the importance of 'Imaginal Static Images'! Then 'whose dream if' it is so implied in all the imagery presented?

12jan17 tdp
Copyright 2017, Terrance DePietro, all rights expressly reserved

Uploaded

January 12th, 2017