If a forest is a symbol for a forest,
doesn’t that take away from its character? Is it necessary to connote beyond
itself, to point away, to point at something else, or is it necessary to
contain meaning in a ball? ‘Forest’ is a symbol for the idea of a forest. A
real forest is representative of all other forests. The lid does not stay, it
cannot bear to stay. Forests are a particular arrangement of trees and land,
shrubs and weeds. Only trees and land and shrubs and weeds do not make up a
forest. Objects are just that, they are independent of purpose. When ordered in
a certain manner, they become this : the idea.
Forests were so arranged from the
beginning. It resists meaning, it resists comprehension. The convexity of such
places, their heartballs’ rolling about, yet nested, repelling all attempts.
No comments:
Post a Comment