Okay, look. If i'm bad at something it's interpreting images. And like, i get symbolism and shit, but that would be it. So i respect people who look at things and say 'oh it represents war' when i see a bunch of flowers and a cigarette. However, there are moments when i read an interpretation and am just struck by how stupid fir me it feels. And maybe it's me, maybe the interpretation is right. But i can't hold it in. I just...
So this is Paul Nash's Landscape of the Vernal Equinox (1944).
I looked at it in my textbook and went 'oh it feels like early spring, where the winter still didn't entirely let go. Beautiful. Wonder what they wrote about it.'
And then i see (i'm paraphrasing bc i'm translating to english): 'the landscape is inauspicious bc it's in cold colours. Those two forest on the second plan also kinda look like mushroom clouds and it was painted two years before Hiroshima and Nagasaki bombing so it has prophetic characteristics-'
What the fuck? What does it do in my textbook? Am i stupid or is it like complete bullshit?







