Jean Gagnepain May 26, 2020 at 4:18 am
When, for example, a mathematician sees an Apple, What you retain your attention? The area of the geometry. But this is also what interested to Cezanne! It is said that abstraction is exactly in the same order. Marc Lore recognizes the significance of this. Mathematician and painter do not treat the sphere in the same way, it is understood, but they are also abstract. Another example, think of Haute Couture. When you see a parade of models, they say: it is not possible! Women will never made it!.
If not this fact for that! That is the eye of the great tailor, Christian Lacroix, for example-, is a geometric look exactly like the eye of the artist painter. What he took as a pattern is not the woman, which mocks frantically. A dress made by an artist of Haute Couture is not to be used in the same way that Cezanne apples are not made to be bitten. In other words what interest to Christian Lacroix, it is a geometric body, exactly as in the architecture we have a geometric Habitat. Either way, they are habit and habitat two very similar words? (this is not accidental that the word Latin habitus, which means way of being, correspond to our two words in Spanish) Briefly, the dress Couture and the Parthenon, are strictly equal! With Jean Gagnepain, we call it figure, almost in the geometrical sense of the term, these two types of the object of art. But this abstraction of art is not only manifested in the plan of technical rationality, but also in the plan of verbal rationality. Thus, in the same way that Cezanne apples aren’t made to be bitten, dress from Christian Lacroix, as consolation of art, is not intended to be used, likewise the verbal message which we call poem is not made to say something (for example: Dear, you can move me bread?).
