Join Date: 29 Apr 2007
Location: California USA
Brothers, and Sisters,
Just got in, did a good bit of kicking it with the team at the Cat and Fiddle, Jack bird went out for a late night pile of yum grub, then slept all a rock like at my friend Keyla's crash box -- She's a fire cracker.
Got some more information on the entire "Samantha goes to Jail" story... What a deal.
So, in for a few winks a bit later in the day I'm sure, but just got my sputtering noggin caught up on the Thoth foot shenanigans posted here, and would like to Jack bird bring in the latest report from my wet gray spark matter (yeah, brain).
Friends here, yeah, person's of insight and leaning, might have reckoned, I do a bit of drawing.
Granted, on the backs of beer coasters mostly, bit I've done a tattoo or two, and worked hared to scratch out a flaming skull, and or a dragon smoking from a big brass hookah.
The deal is, in my take on such, accidently putting two left (or right) feet on a subject (the central finger of the composition -- the thing the drawing or sculpture, or painting) is about, is a error of gargantuan proportions.
It is more then a mistake of perspective, or Jack bird detail, and is the kind of error that once pointed out, would be impossible not to address... Impossible to ignore (like what's gone on here on this thread -- bring that -- bring me my sandwich), and it is the kind of deal that would travel around quickly between any group of people really interested in studying the work of the artist in question.
When Michelangelo carved the figure of Moses for the tomb of Julius 2 in 1515, he placed some big crazy Jack action horns on the old "free my people" dudes head.
"What? Old staff swinging Mo Man had horns?"
Yeah, plan as day -- to big horns poking out of his noggin.
Well at the Jack bird time, back when he started chipping, the bible -- that part old gray Moses bringing the stone tablets down from mount monkey fire -- that description at the time was a bit off.
It was to be written that Moses head was all illuminated with light, but the translation of the word into the lingo of the day put it all down as "horns."
You can see this clear as day, and it was a mistake.
A mistake that is now well documented, and understood.
So my thought is, once this wild two left foot action was pointed out, it would either be addressed with, "Oh, that's not a mistake, that's symbolic of the idea of ____________ (place best guess here), or "that's not a mistake, that's the bottom of the mans foot."
The first would have been written down, as it's part of the stylistic structure of the card.
The later would have been greeted with, "Oh, I see, I had it flipped in my head."
And not as likely to be made a fuss about.
In my fuzzy mine, if it was stylistic it would be easy to find it referenced.
Of, perhaps it's just a wild bit of fancy.
Durant "time for sleep" Hapke
"I don't try anything, I just, I just, I just do it..."
|06-10-2008||Ask a Professional Tarot Reader Top #31|
Ads by Google
via Google Adsense
Join Date: 02 Feb 2006
Location: NSW, Australia
So .... I had to think; How come I never noticed (no Aeon, not because my old deck is so faded - re- me not seeing Abracadabra ... oh so many posts ago). It is becasue it looks natural. The feet, at a glance, appear opposite the big toes are on the inside where they should be ... but not when your legs are crossed, that makes big toes 'on the outside'.
It seems like a lame reason but perhaps Frieda just made the mistake of not 'realising' the legs were crossed when she painted in the detail of the feet - it isnt a normal anatomic modeling position.
Otherwise I'll just have to ask Frieda in one of my Harris / Crowley channelings
"Do what thou wilt Faustus." Mephistopheles to Dr. Faustus.
|07-10-2008||Ask a Professional Tarot Reader Top #32|