PICTURES

An Explanation By Andy Stennett and John Rocca

To capture the essence of what he sees, the artist has to interpret in such 
a way that others will experience a degree of enlightenment from his work. 
The painting, which amounts to nothing more than a metaphor of its real 
counterpart, however, can never actually become more than what it is trying 
to evoke. If it were accepted that the clarity of an image could only be as 
strong as its power of suggestion, then one should be able to 'paint' with 
equal effect by smell, touch or any of the senses.

Experimentation within syn-aesthetics has been developing for over 100 
years. Even so, we decided it would be a new challenge to 'paint' with 
music, through the vehicle of the popular song. With magnetic tape for 
canvas and electronic boxes for paints, PICTURES began to evolve.

We developed the idea that if sensations of hearing and vision could be de-
lineated into a series of electrical or chemical signals to the brain, then 
what would happen if 'cables' to ear and eye were interchanged? Would the 
ear see and the eye hear? Relative to their proper functions the ears would 
perhaps be less sensitive to contrast in light and similarly the eye would 
not be able to distinguish minute changes in pitch. Nevertheless, the eye 
and ear would be more than likely to have a small degree of responsitivity 
in their new roles. If this were accepted, then would someone listening to 
PICTURES through their eyes experience a strong visual connection in their 
mind's ear? If they did, this would undermine the very semantic of sight 
and sound, but nevertheless would be a monitor of the effectiveness of the 
PICTURES project in its power and consistency of visual projection.

                                                          June 1983