Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site batcomputer.TN.CORNELL.EDU
Path: utzoo!decvax!tektronix!uw-beaver!cornell!batcomputer!cheryl
From: cheryl@batcomputer.TN.CORNELL.EDU (cheryl)
Newsgroups: talk.philosophy.misc,net.women,net.poems
Subject: Re: Perceptions
Message-ID: <1021@batcomputer.TN.CORNELL.EDU>
Date: Mon, 15-Sep-86 11:50:16 EDT
Article-I.D.: batcompu.1021
Posted: Mon Sep 15 11:50:16 1986
Date-Received: Wed, 17-Sep-86 13:39:49 EDT
References: <1860@ihlpa.UUCP>
Reply-To: cheryl@batcomputer.UUCP (cheryl)
Distribution: na
Organization: Theory Center, Cornell University, Ithaca NY
Lines: 21

In article <1860@ihlpa.UUCP> zazam@ihlpa.UUCP (Azam) writes:
>
>      It is very easy to take an object/idea for its face value. The real
>      appreciation   comes   out   of	 theorizing   about  the  probable
>      interpretations/causes/(fill in your  pick).  You  discover  a  new
>      form, a different perspective, on things	that you take for granted,
>      or ignore as being 'just	a name'. This  is  true	 for  objects  and
>      people  equally.	 Understanding	the  real  ideas behind	an artists
>      work, what he/she wants to convey to the	 process.  Just	 when  you
>      think  you know what she/he wants to convey, you	come across a fact
>      which jolts the foundations of your understanding of his/her work.

>      Any experiences/ideas/additions on this thought process?

Yes.   The interpretation process can be taken to extremes.  I recall
a Ken Nordine bit where a guy comes home from work to find a bag of
parsnips on the counter.   He concludes that his wife thinks that he's
"snippy."  The whole bit consists of his internal paranoic dialogue.
And the rooster, of course.

Cheryl