Ultimately I must admit, one of the reasons it succeeds is because of its ambiguity amongst its chaos.
We don’t know if he is saving her or drowning her, we don’t know what their relationship is or was, if she wants to perish, if she already has. We don’t know.
We all see it differently, and we all make up the rest.
That is what pop songs are for. We place ourselves amongst the chaos of syncopation and catchy riffs into the hands of a narrative that is loosely defined by the lyrics.
I understand that.
Since a single medium will only lend you one dimension it is up to the viewer to create the rest.
That may very well be what art is after.
After enough exposure we make it ours.
We fill in the blanks out of curiosity, or ego, or imagination, and we become part of the work.
It is our forced creation through the uncompleted dimensions of living in our multidimensional perspectives.
That is if ANYONE is even trying anymore, but they aren’t.
Instead they’re just talking about tax breaks and paid time off and utilizing the ease of experience.
We all have this incredible gift to analyze and debate and inspect how these beautiful emotions are expelled from our minds and all I hear about is sharpening the production for cost benefits.
I just don’t think this is my world.
So I’m going to go ahead and bury my head in this incredible painting.
I’m going to try to remember the color of her eyes before I lost her to the sea.
Thank you so very much Alfred Guillou for this, I will come back to it again and again, and it will engage a multitude of emotions and thoughts for as long as I live.
Edit: I just want to talk art. I need to find more people into that. it's on me for not looking hard enough.