AKID, day three: “Senescence” reveals snarky shadow

Received a new comment on AKID. Really like it, as somehow it nudges me to actually, and in every single endless moment, DO what I feel burbling up inside me, move into playful senescence! Here’s Kieron’s comment:

YES YES!

So, in the spirit of play — and remember, the great thing about old woman playing is she really doesn’t give a damn as to what YOU “think” of her. Reputation thrown to the wolves decades ago, she just lives to have fun, and in my case, given my double-Sagittarian nature, to also layer that fun with radiating meaning, as well as, let’s face it, as here, in this post, briefly lapse into my own mother’s snarkiness.

So, yes, in thr spirit of real and snarky playfulness, two photos, with superficial similarity, struck me today. The first feels so glorious it takes my breath away: a woman, dwarfed in wondrous color, gathers vegetables within a luscious field of concentrically planted rows of plants of various kinds crowded together — the way plants like it!

A permaculturist’s vision of paradise!

The work of growing food transformed into majestic art!

Okay, speaking of art, here’s another, similarly “green” photo, the already famous, or infamous “portrait” of Obama (and Michelle). But wait, let’s do the drama leading up to it.

At the Smithsonian, the unveiling ceremony, waiting with bated breath . . .

At last, they appear! Both simulated and in reality!

Former US President Barack Obama and First Lady Michelle Obama stand before their portraits and respective artists, Kehinde Wiley (L) and Amy Sherald (R), after an unveiling at the Smithsonian’s National Portrait Gallery in Washington, DC, February 12, 2018. / AFP PHOTO / SAUL LOEB / RESTRICTED TO EDITORIAL USE – MANDATORY MENTION OF THE ARTIST UPON PUBLICATION – TO ILLUSTRATE THE EVENT AS SPECIFIED IN THE CAPTION (Photo credit should read SAUL LOEB/AFP/Getty Images)

Note the need for making sure the above photo is correctly sourced. So very different from the photo taken of nature’s abundance. I wish I knew the source! I would be glad to credit the photographer.

But here we go, already; even with the natural photo, we plod knee deep into cultural requirements, one tiny detail of the thick, multilayered scrim that the magnificently creative human need for language (given that our original capacity for telepathy has been erased by fluoride to the pineal gland) overlays upon the real, palpable, physical world, driving us further and further into our “minds,” separating us further and further from our own physical bodies as sensitive, attuned antennas of the natural world!

In other words, humanity’s extraordinary creativity with language and other symbol systems, including photography and other forms of art, can work to enhance life or to kill it; can be used “for good” or “for evil,” and not just blatantly. Sometimes covertly, for example, via great masses of confusion stirred by contradictory disinfo and misinfo. For a current analysis of this phenomenon, see “The Confusion Principle” by Lisa Renee.

But I digress.

Let’s now look at the “presidential portraits” up close and impersonal:

Geez, are these cartoons?

(I’m not even gonna bother with the Michelle photo, which first of all, does not look like “her,” and features “the dress” bigley. After all, fashion is of the essence? But I do wonder what Michelle actually really thought about the portrait . . .)

So now, let’s call attention to Barack’s situation in his photo: on a chair? with larger than life hands, one of which appears to have six fingers? But never mind that. What I’m interested in is the foliage surrounding him. I’ve seen some comment that the foliage is “bushes,” symbolic of how Obama follows Bush, both Repubs and Demos being wings of the same monstrous, anti-life Deep State regime.

But officially? I read somewhere that the profusion of plant life in the portrait is supposed to represent all his accomplishments. Huh?

Oops, here we go. In this world of electronic (and other) verisimilitude, might it be that his “accomplishments” are digitally copied? That certainly would make it easier on the “painter.”

Somehow, I don’t think this happens in wild nature, nor in organic fields. Oh yes, I’m sure plant clones proliferate “in nature” too, given the tendency of Big Ag to want to repeat ad nauseam what brings in the most profits. But let’s just stick with the one glorious concentric ring photo in the field way above. Repetitions? NOT. Every single plant occupies its own unique niche, in concert with all the others. That’s part of what makes this painting of that field so glorious.

Furthermore, at least for me, what makes that photo glorious is that the human is dwarfed by nature’s bounty. So very different from a “portrait,” which puts the human in the center of creation. Always. That’s just what we do, at least we in the west who glorify the personal ego and allow the context to “fade into the background.”

But wait a minute! just as with Michelle’s photo, which stresses (bare arms in) an expensive “designer dress,” in the case of the Barack portrait, the context, “nature,” does not fade; in fact “nature” crowds in upon the human figure. That in itself is worth noting. Perhaps this painting prophesizes the takeover of nature, finally, from human pretense of “control”?

Oh yeah.

I wish it were that easy, to just erase the poisoned scrim of human attempts to dominate nature.

Okay, now look at how this photo lines up with all the oil-painted others, if it were to be chosen as the “official” presidential photo (and not just in the Smithsonian). Hmmm, doing a little internet sleuthing, wondering if the official presidential portraits are in the White House. Still haven’t found the official answer, but did discover that this photo will be part of “an exhibit in the [Smithsonian’s] National Portrait Gallery, the only place outside the White House with a complete collection of presidential portraits from George Washington to Barack Obama.”

Oh my. So this is what it will look like, in context?

Geez, it stands out like a green thumb, er, oops! I mean a sore thumb.

So tell me, which do you prefer, a photo of nature’s wonders cooperating abundantly with human needs, or a photo of faked, copied “plants” pretending to somehow enhance a “presidential portrait.”

Oh yeah, one more thing: someone on twitter wondered if some of the Obama plant leaves were poison ivy.

Ouch!

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

7 Responses to AKID, day three: “Senescence” reveals snarky shadow

  1. The Elite never do anything without symbolism involved. There are deeper meanings for these absurd portraits I would imagine. I liked the analogy of the plant life eventually taking over Obama. He needs to be gone! VK

  2. Barbara says:

    Oh, my, Ann, you are having just way too much fun! Me, too, going back to being a kid again… it’s the only way being senior makes heart sense. Remember when we were kids, we dived into whatever… poison ivy too… but always there was a remedy, whether inside or outside. Thank you for your green heart… thumb, too. Love, B.

  3. rose day says:

    Ann, the concept of senescence as ‘second childhood’ is an intriguing premise that does however require a bit of discernment. In general usage the term senescence denotes ‘deterioration due to ageing’ and functions as origin in the word senility.

    Controllers well know the power of words in promoting memes and senile is not a word that one would use to describe a person of your energetic presence.

    As an attendant issue, Earth is presently in a planetary cycle that is offering significant opportunity for accessing transformative feminine energy which requires support from mature and evolving men and women now and possibly more than ever before in the story of humanity’s collective evolution.

    That said, the creativity and exuberance associated with child’s play in tandem with the experience and wisdom offered in life lessons can only enhance the evolutionary process. The challenge is holding wonder in the face of harsh knowing . . . not easy but not impossible.

    • Kieron says:

      Rose, I’m more than aware of the power of words and the controllers’ efforts to make us speak the words that sap our power. To wit, we work during the week/weak, to arrive at the weekend/weakened. And so forth. I deliberately chose the word senescence to contrast with adolescence. However, I’ve always understood the word to have the concept of maturation, although it’s true the word “senile” is derived from it. Looking up the actual meaning does show the connotation of deterioration, which I somehow never picked up. Hmm. Perhaps the better word would be sagacious, i.e “sage” or wise old(er) person. I’m reminded of Madeleine L’Engle’s story “A Wind in the Door,” the follow-up to “A Wrinkle In Time,” the wise plant being, called Senex, “wise old one,” calls on a younger character, called Sporos (Greek for seed?) to “deepen” or put down roots and resist the temptations of the Echthroi (the X’ers, the destroyers) to stay young and carefree and immature. Remind you of anything? 🙂 The story is full of hidden meaning. I really recommend it.

  4. rose day says:

    Thanks Kieron for all of the good info!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *