Chewing on the words from Lori’s reading…The whole debate of occularity (?) is so interesting to me because it seems that while we try to frame our experience in art as being visual (positively, or negatively), apprehending the world through other senses inevitably enters in. Why is this important? I guess because to me it seems obvious that we experience the world through a multitude of senses, sometimes separately and sometimes all muddled together. Phenomenology is a way of giving language to sensory perceptions and at its most poetic, a way of reminding us of our place in the world. (us -humans? Do trees need to tell of their being-in-the world?)
“Presence is the necessary beginning of an intentional dialogue between self and other at the heart of the artmaking process. The world is always speaking, but most of the time we do not allow ourselves to listen attentively. What if we were to listen, attend, respond – knowingly participate in the conversation?” Beth Carruthers
In my mind this conversation is the productive part of this essay precisely because it refers to dialogue, reciprocity, an exchange. Vision, as Carruthers reminds us, is not limited to a one way experience, but at the same time, in art theory and practice we do tend to dwell on our outgoing visual experience. What about dwelling? Being?
Synesthesia is a condition where the response to stimulus in one sense is felt in another sense. For example, the sound of dishes clattering is experienced as a fireworks of colour in the mind of the person receiving the sensory information. Cross-sensory metaphors are not necessarily intentional but are not a medical condition.
The smell of too much thinking is forcing me into the studio right now.