I thought both the article and the video very enlightening. However, they left me with a lot more logistical questions about it all. For instance, how do they produce a sound based image of a snow flake, do they use an actual snow flake or is it a means of replication, meaning that the form snowflakes take on have some kind of communal elements with sound. And if it is the former, knowing how fragile a snow flake is how on earth would they accomplish that? In terms of synesthetics, I wonder if this association is a constant or if it comes and goes as the reflectionist artist seems to suggest. I love the fact that she uses these synesthetic moments to harness a universal sense of beauty, it's such a fantastic thought. I also wonder if it is a two way street for some synesthetics. For instance, the woman who listens to music and paints the corresponding colors and textures...does she see some other painting and hear some new sound scape, some symphonic registry that we'll never have access to? I'm terribly envious. Particularly with the acupuncturist response, it seems like some ramped up hypnogogic vision, terribly interesting stuff. I think what I take from all this is a level of connectivity with the universe, how everything is energy and manifests itself in different ways. Perhaps that makes me sound foolish but that's what I believe and when I see sound slowly shifting into visual patterns, it just makes me think that these are all different expressions of the same thing: energy, vibrations, strings, etc. I also like the fact that artists can either attempt to reproduce their synesthetic visions or can attempt to access synesthetic insight through their emotional connections. I think even if Kadinsky isn't a true synesthetic, he's tapping into the same process in a completely different way (eg emotional response).
Also, I'm fascinated by water so I found Marcia Smilack's work particularly interesting. I thought I would post of few images that I enjoyed of hers (found via google image search):
Original Response for McLaren Film:
"I enjoyed the film a great deal. It almost seemed like an attempt to harness a visual response to Jazz, to establish a call and response with the score within the genre's formal guidelines. The shift between a percussive response and the more fluid response went with the score beautifully, allowing the viewer to almost evaporate in those solos, denying the interruption of the visual staccato. The break in the middle of hte piece was also lovely, as the recurring image of strings seemed to to change into stars or floating orbs of fire, as if to suggest the transformative quality of the music. I was also reminded of an internalization process, like the rush of blood in the more fluid segments, as if we were either entering the musician's bloodstream or the music's bloodstream itself. A lovely, evocative work.
First, it is so nice to discover you are a fan of my work! In answer to your questions, I am a bidirectional synesthete (which is rare among synesthetes). I both hear sound elicited by what I see and see visions created by what I hear, though the sounds and images in the two directions are not alike i.e. it's not like a loop except with my own work where e.g. if I hear cello when I shoot, I hear cello again when I look at the image later. As for frequency, I experience synesthesia all the time. B/w, I'm happy to answer any other questions you might have but it may be better to write me at my regular email address as I forget to check gmail: marcia@marciasmilack.com. Happy to be introduced to your blog.
ReplyDelete