iliafarniev

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

Jutland, Denmark<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

barns is what we got<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

<div></div>

Now we run this thread - I was curious whether one can see difference

between a tiger and tigress without checking on hind parts. Does

anyone know?<div></div>

<p>O'kay. The Investigatory Pictography. EI: Muybridge J. Eadwarde and Hr. Sammallahti of Finland. May not seem to be very obvious but it's true. Musicaly: Indian Ragas. I think there architectural aspect to it because of seeing perspectives is unescapable in the city and very restricting too. Then beauty of nature in general and probably the light on sub-photonic level as well.</p>

in beautiful Mid-Jutland landscape<div></div>

<div></div>

<p>"Is it an issue at all?" No. Apparently. Clichès are good and they are there (here) and they need (must / has) to be used. Besides, it is practically impossible to get read of them anyway, so - learn not to bore yourself out of selfpresumed sophisticatedness and start to admire - it's better like this.</p>

<p>Julie.</p>

<p>"...to coerce a particular response to the mystical ... " it is very possible and that's what they basically do, imo but mostly creating the structure for individuals to adhere to, creating bonds and boundaries, if you like. The specific example can be anything of high culture of W. Europe starting from XI century and up to the middle of XVII cen. where it also started to develope along the humanist - cecular - intellectual trends in societies as they appeared, still very controled to the general needs and determined by actual possibilities. Practically, the whole of painting, sculpture, architecture and music of the time period was cultural instrument of power. The word <strong>art / artist</strong> started to apper in the second half of XVIII when enough of the audience became available. All the artists before then were not artists in modern sense of the word but a craftsmen with particular talent hired to do the job. I don't think the <strong>personal liberation</strong> as such was anyones concern at the times simply because there was no room, need or practical possibility for it. The idea of personal freedom aka free will -- of any kind started to appear only in XVII cen. on very top of societies among conceptual philosophers such as Descartes, Kant and so on. Took at least two centuries of work before enough people with enough baily bread started to appear just to think this way.</p>

<p>With some reservation reg. meaning of world <strong>art</strong> and modern times tendencies, often quite unbriddled btw, I must say for personal self-expression of different kinds, I would rather disagree with suggestion that "art trends toward liberation ..." For the most part of human history the creation of art objects were very restricted to ritual and rational purposes of society. And in very controled way, too. For the most part it remains to be so even in our days Western cultural tradition imo.</p>