How would you interpret these short enigmatic sentences?
I found these three sentences spread separately on a piece of A4 paper near The National Art School in Sydney:
[b]1. “What does the hairdresser see between mirrors?”
2. “Is the dot inside the circle the dot outside the sphere?”.
3. “When the pieces stop moving, the witness goes blind.”[/b]
I've been wracking my brain, and I have some ideas about what each sentence means, but I'm really interested in what others think.
1. Infinity. This reminds me of standing in a lift between two mirrors, where you can see infinity extending outwards, but the view is always obscured by your own head. The more I think about it, the more I think that this is about the irony of subjectivity - your senses allow you to know the world, but they ensure that your perception of it is distorted. In this image, the hairdresser is surrounded by infinity but can never see its centre.
2. I think this is also about the tension surrounding perspectives. Imagine a dot inside a circle (a nipple for example), and a dot outside a sphere (a nipple is outside a semi-sphere, for example). I wonder if this one is about how people can have contradictory perspectives of the same scene, but both perspectives are accurate. This question seems to be asking us to entertain contradictory perspectives simultaneously.
3. This image doesn't seem clear enough for me to be confident that the intended meaning is conveyed, but I have been thinking about it for a long time. I wonder if it is about camouflage. If you invert the sentence, you get: "When there is movement, the camouflaged becomes visible".
Your thoughts welcome! When I have received some really good interpretations, I'd like to print them underneath the questions, and post it up inside the Art School where I found them to begin with.
Thanks.
[b]1. “What does the hairdresser see between mirrors?”
2. “Is the dot inside the circle the dot outside the sphere?”.
3. “When the pieces stop moving, the witness goes blind.”[/b]
I've been wracking my brain, and I have some ideas about what each sentence means, but I'm really interested in what others think.
1. Infinity. This reminds me of standing in a lift between two mirrors, where you can see infinity extending outwards, but the view is always obscured by your own head. The more I think about it, the more I think that this is about the irony of subjectivity - your senses allow you to know the world, but they ensure that your perception of it is distorted. In this image, the hairdresser is surrounded by infinity but can never see its centre.
2. I think this is also about the tension surrounding perspectives. Imagine a dot inside a circle (a nipple for example), and a dot outside a sphere (a nipple is outside a semi-sphere, for example). I wonder if this one is about how people can have contradictory perspectives of the same scene, but both perspectives are accurate. This question seems to be asking us to entertain contradictory perspectives simultaneously.
3. This image doesn't seem clear enough for me to be confident that the intended meaning is conveyed, but I have been thinking about it for a long time. I wonder if it is about camouflage. If you invert the sentence, you get: "When there is movement, the camouflaged becomes visible".
Your thoughts welcome! When I have received some really good interpretations, I'd like to print them underneath the questions, and post it up inside the Art School where I found them to begin with.
Thanks.
Comments (17)
The customer's side views. If you are going to draw perspective is important.
Quoting Thomas Stevenson
The difference between 2D and 3D drawing. A good artist will make a ball with a spot on it appear to be a ball with a spot on it, not just a circle with a spot in it.
Quoting Thomas Stevenson
Drawings, paintings, even statues need to show action to make them realistic. There is a lot of difference between the realness of a painting of a potted plant sitting on a table and a plant in a garden that has people and life around it.
What I see is pretentiousness, as in three generally vague statements devoid of context, presented in an art show pretending to have significance. It's what happens when mediocre minds have nothing to say. They say nothing and stand around and pretend like they said something.
That's what I see. That's the beauty of art. We can all see different things when we look at it.
I was thinking along similar lines - all three seem to be about perspective. I have an idea what I think each one means but I'll wait to see what others think first.
Your take on these riddles is quite inspiring. Thank you for this!
Allow me to venture a few propositions:
Quoting Thomas Stevenson[/b]
=> It is interesting that this question is never asked when there is a discussion about image reflection on two mirrors parallel and opposite to each other. While most would argue an endless procession of images, the other truth is that the same reflections obscure the fact of the hairdresser's reality. The images on the mirror will always be a dimension short of reality - 2D not 3D. Also, in the mirror, the hairdresser does not see a person between two mirrors, they just see a person (or only what is between the mirrors), over and over, which is not the right perspective.
- This riddle may explain the saying by Carl G. Jung which states, "who looks outside, dreams; who looks within, awakes." All the significant details are right there in between the mirrors where direct observation is possible. Within the mirrors is the reflection (image, facade) but not the reality. We seek the truth of our lives by seeking meaning from external phenomena when we should be studying ourselves because we are that truth manifest. Our lives are absolute to us, what else can be greater?
Quoting Thomas Stevenson[/b]
=> "...When love beckons to you, follow him, Though his ways are hard and steep.
And When his wings enfold you yield to him, Though the sword hidden among his pinions may wound you.
And When he speaks to you believe in him, Though his voice may shatter your dreams as the north wind lays waste the garden..."
"...But if in your fear you would seek only love’s peace and love’s pleasure, Then it is better for you that you cover your nakedness and pass out of love’s threshing-floor,
Into the season-less world where you shall laugh, but not all of your laughter, and weep, but not all of your tears..." (From The Prophet by Kahlil Gibran - It's a teaching on love.)
The second riddle can be explained from the above quote. This is a world of pleasure and pain, of highs and lows, of relativity. Those who think they can choose one without recourse for the other are lost. They are like that dot within the circle which from the bigger perspective is a dot outside the sphere. The highs of this generation are the lows of the next. Human evolution is a flower that blooms on the grave (or from the demise) of past civilizations. Our greatest feats, the 'epicentre of our circle', are to the next generation a cautionary tale, 'a point outside their sphere'.
Quoting Thomas Stevenson[/b]
=> Perception is perspective. Perspective is a frame of reference, a relative aspect between viewpoints. Without perspective, there is no perception. (This is kind of a layman's interpretation - Here, perception is a part of the process towards knowing and understanding and therefore action.)
=> Also, Life is activity. To 'be' is to 'do'.
"3:5. No one can stay truly action-less even for a moment, for the properties of prakriti (matter or substance) compel all to act!
4:18. They who see non-action in activity and action in inactivity are truly conscious... "
(From The Bhagavad Gita - teachings by Krishna.)
This could have many extraneous answers.
A. At the hair shop, one would see the wall that the two mirrors are mounted against.
B. She could see herself.
C. Air that is invisible, but is between the mirrors.
ETC
I think the interesting answer is the opposing mirror effect where you see many reflections in a row.
[QUOTE]3. “When the pieces stop moving, the witness goes blind.”
.
If you invert the sentence, you get: "When there is movement, the camouflaged becomes visible".
[/QUOTE]
I like that answer the best. Cats and hawks only see their prey from a distance when they move.
I had always thought about this one as if the infinite reflection was the greater reality, obstructed from view by one's one head, the apparatus for perception. But I like what you said, I'm going to keep thinking about it.
That's my bet for this one too. I didn't arrive at that take until I tried inverting it also.
Thanks everyone!
What does the hairdresser see between the two mirrors? If the mirrors are back to back (or front to front) he or she probably can't see anything between the two mirrors. What can you see between two bricks? It depends how far apart the two bricks are, for starters.
What happens when you stare into the abyss?
You get scared? :gasp:
If you gaze into an abbess, she'll probably be quite annoyed.
I agree with Hanover. You can make these kinds of statements mean whatever you want without context. Apart from a context, they are just words. So what happens is that people give these words their own context, i.e., a subjective meaning based on their private context. We do this with art, and that's fine, but trying to make something significant out it as though there is some deep meaning to it, is silly.
But it would be nicer to do. :joke:
I think part of the problem is the way the OP is phrased, which seems to presume that there is some particular hidden meaning to each sentence whereas it seems obvious to me that they are exercises for the imagination. But, yes, accusations of pretentiousness do seem to miss the point.
Is there any suggestion that there might be either literal or non-literal meanings? The OP asks people for suggestions about the possible meaning. Anything is therefore a possible correct answer.
Quoting Pattern-chaser
Again, is there any reason not to take them literally? Are you an artist? For all we know they might be nothing more than ideas for a painting, or even names for a book.
Quoting Pattern-chaser
First of all they are not statements but questions. Secondly there is no proof that they were written by an artist. If they had been found near a police station, would you have taken them to be crime scene notes?
These resemble zen poetry to me. Zen koans can seem nonsensical at first, but they are used to increase understanding of very specific concepts (thought at first they might seem bamboozling or self-indulgent). We'll see.
That will be interesting.