I can only define reality by the state of my relationships with the world around me.
If a single word view has numerous meanings, can I expect a viewer to see the same thing in the image above as I do? Or that we can all draw agreeable conclusions about what this image represents; a picture of art or reality? The first choice offers boundless space between wants, dreams and desires. The second carries the opposite connotation, and who doesn't want to escape it?
The word landscape in arts is generally associated with the representation of land in a way that pleases our senses. The images above and below represent lands in southern Ontario that are nearby. What then if they looked the opposite way in the past?
The world alive evidently survives by carving out an orderly space of living conditions in the physical world, where a natural state of matter is a disorder.
It takes time to fully realize what it does mean. And time is catching up with reality for all of us, and sooner than anyone expected to.
How to see the future? Isn't it an outcome of a collision between what we want and what the world can supply? After all, we all need oxygen in every breath we take and foot on a table. Casualties have no voice in the narratives that follow them.
The world around us is full of meanings. One can notice glimpses of them better when a need to communicate them arises. Assembling them is a process, like everything else, like reality, a chain of linked consequences. Seeing them is meaningful itself.
"The painter constructs, the photographer discloses."
Susan Sontag, American writer.