[A/H Series MAIN]  [AH Index]
A/H (series): Morphing (transformation)

See also:   -[Translation]- (LIT entry)
            -[Entropy]- (mis-translation, interpreted text, etc)
                                  (as performed text) 
            -[Translation]- (as morphing)
                -[Film: Fades, etc.]- (as film element)
 
btw: it may help as your're reading this to listen
     Coltrane's "Greensleves Album" - "Chasin' the train".
 
On this page:  {Intro} 
               {} 
               {Morphing in Art} (visual properties)
               {Morphing properties of something} 
                   {Morphing properties via CONTEXT}
                   {Transformation/Morphing via "Seeing"} (Seeing meaning "seer")
               {Abstract Morphing} 
               {Time Morphing} 
               {Film Morphing}                
               {} 
               {} 
               {} 
               {} 
               {}                

          
    
Intro

The concept of morphing is two-fold known:

  1. Take pictures A and B
  2. By "some process" turn A into B.

Morph also refers to any change in form. Don't
confuse with morpheus (the god of sleep; qv: -[The Matrix]-
Note that in super-hero speak the super hero
(or villan, mascot, car) TRANSFORMS.

I've chosen "morph" for the simple reason that when
this technique became avail on computers - not using
gel's or other cartoon methods. People thought we
were talking about "The Mighty Morphing Power Rangers".
Who were popular at the time.  -[Power Rangers]- (in sf-film)

In film, there is of course the fade and such which
in reality transform either time or space - as such
we might argue that they follow a "normal" transition/
morphing movement. 

On the otherhand, the possibility of being transformed
is the process of living in terms of story, life,
and of course travel. This reminds us of Chief
Justice Oliver Wendle Holms ??sp?? comment:

    A mind expanded by a new idea
    rarely returns to its original
    dimensions.

-- prob not an exact quote.

As we mentioned before when a super-hero 
"transforms" from their secret identity
to their "let's get down to business" form,
we don't see it as "morphing". As such,
the really first person to morph would
have been the HULK. He doesn't transform
consciously and in some cases where he
wants to transform (morph) so that he
can use his extra strength, he can't.

Of course growth (and decay) are direct
examples of morphing - or at least the
"normal" passage of time. Of course, the
true "morphing" occurs in such things as
metamorphosis; eg, caterpiller to moth/butterfly.

And of course, in terms of both theology and
metaphysics the transformation involving death
is the ultimate morph. 

We take as read the resurrection of Christ
(whether that was Jesus or not), re-incarnation,
and shape-shifting as examples in religion,
theology, and metaphysics. And of course, in
literature; eg, "Hunter S Thompson, R.I.P"
in the introduction to his (finally) printed
essays and articles: Saying goodby to the 
past on New Year's Eve.
 
 


Morphing in Art

NOTE: This section addresses ONLY the VISUAL 
      content/properties of  
      art things. The PROPERTIES are adressed in
      the next section:  {Morphing properties of something}

In many cases the morphing is implied. For
example, in paintings of the transfiguration
of Christ or in the Annunciation of Jesus'
mother angels or cherib signfy the incipient
change. (see section of properties, in next
section).

In terms of both religion and politics, this
transformation may be carried even more
in-diectly by symbols. For example, the
merging of the Upper and Lower Nile
civilisations in Ancient Egypt meant that 
"crown" would now show both the cobra and
the hawk.  ??bird??

need gifs:    7th, 12th, and 15th dynasties

And of course, in Ancient Greek mythologies,
the gods readily morphed themselves. 

   Zeus and the swan, etc

In that era, the most important of these (in
terms of Greek literature) was in fact (in my
humble oppinon) was in Aethena who takes so
many forms in order to help Ulyses.

In terms of ritual and symbolism there-of, the
rites of passage indicate the transformation.
For example, in the traditional Christian 
marriage, the bride enters on her father's 
arm, and leaves on the arm of her (now) husband.

     They enter (word-wise) as   bride and groom
                  and leave as husband and wife. 

     Note the word order of the phrases.

Similarly for all rites of passage, as well as 
many state occasions. We take it as NOT read
that all rituals are not necessarily morphic
in nature.

      
   


Morphing properties of something

NOTE: We take it as read that an object
      (art object or sacred, person, etc)
      MAY have morphing properties. That
      is a picture of a long lost sibling
      can transform us just by gazing on it.

In this section:  {Morphing properties of something} 
                  {Morphing properties via CONTEXT}
                  {Transformation/Morphing via "Seeing"} (Seeing meaning "seer")
       
When we take to morph the properties of something,
then we are altering one of its attributes. The
section above  {morphing in art (visual properties)}
morphing of ART OBJECTS - and as such addressed
the property of the OBJECT'S APPEARANCE.


The Object as Morpher
(The King's Touch)

Let us take morphing in the sense of "transformation".
We know that "The King's Touch" was long exploited
by royalty as a transference from the gods that 
since there is an hierarchy of authority, that
they as "next to the highest" could perform
miracles and such. Note that this is NOT the same
in many cultures/belief systems; most notably in
the role of Shaman, Witch/Witch Doctor, Intercessor, 
Seer, etc. Refer to my paper on "Artist as Shaman".

Note that in reality, the "kings touch" in connecting
(in the case of Christianity) with Christ as 
intercessor. It is almost certain that Christ
did NOT exhibit any attributes of a Witch/Witch
Doctor (as healer, herbalist, etc). However, there
is evidence of Christ as Shaman (healer through
touch and as diviner of "other world" forces).
We take as READ these similarities for what 
they are worth.

As such, we are led immediately to the power of
relics, pilgramages, and all purification rites.
We take these as READ as inherent properties of
sacred objects. Now, as to whether we can ALTER
these, transfer them, or even erase them is a
question for the detailed texts of the belief
system - or at very least a metaphysical discussion
of such. 

We do NOT take as read the art act nor the 
transformation itself which we discuss in the
section after the next one.

Morphing an Object

Let us now look at physically changing the
object. Regardless of any other methods or
approaches to the object. Take a text object
like the following:

    so an argument about buying

   "all those expensive paper plates and spices"

yes, but we're using stryofoam plates 
  bay leaves, irregano, basil 
  you know something other than *merely*
  salt and pepper???  

  That's why i end up buying ONE squash 
  and cooking it for myself - what's that
  yellow stuff??? Is THAT corn????

  ...(silently looks at the ceiling and
      mouths the words "Why me????)....

  ...(wanh, wahn, whaaaa)... fade to commercial.


   


Morphing properties via CONTEXT
As Umberto Ecco reminds us:

    "Context is King".





   


Transformation/Morphing via "Seeing"
(Seeing meaning "seer")


Here we take "seeing" to mean primarily in 
the role as a seer. Note that this can be a
role as "self-seer" if we look at something in
a new way and hence perceive new or hidden 
properties of the object - art object or 
otherwise.

The act of seeing is of two natures:

  1) Looking
  2) Acting

When we look into the object and learn more about
it, then we (as diviner) attach more content to
the object. Just by looking at it, we transform
it (at least in our mind or our perception of it,
or (if we teach - leader concept) we may alter
how others see the object). This may lead to more
people LOOKING at the object and thus particpating
in the morphing of the object and its non-apparent
content. 

In ACTING, we must active participate in the object.
This be as simple as touching it (again the King's
Touch as well as that of relics, scape goats, etc).
or it may be as drastic as destroying it; eg, the
role of the sand paintings in Navajo Shamanistic
healing practice where the sands "absorb" or 
(through the shaman's actions/words/etc) "balance"
the illness or other in-correctness of the person,
tribe, universe.

Note: The concept of creating the object in the
      first place can be viewed as "discovering"
the object (inventing). We can also think of it
as put-ing it into actual (existant) form as with
Hegel's triad:  

     God creates all concepts
     Man perceives these as ideas
     Man builds the object (gives it form)

Thus, for each object: God, Man, Object all form
an inter-dependent mirroring of the meta-process
Concept, Idea, Form. As i recall, this is discussed
in Hegel's "Phenomenology of Spirit".

Finally, we note that areas of study such as
physics, art history, archaeology, etc. are in
reality (usually) a NON-VISUAL morphing of the
inert properties of the "found object" (whether
it is a "quark" (and hence "quark-ness"), a 
"lost artist" (eg, Egon Schille), or a 
re-interpretation of previous ideas concerning 
a site/mound, causes (and effects) of wars, 
movements, etc, etc.

It is important to remember that according
Reverend Berkley (pron: Bar klay) 

    "To be perceived is to exist"

But what the nature of that existince IS, is
morphed by "seeing" it.


 


Abstract Morphing

We take as read that for the most part this 
form of morphing is (almost by definition)
MODERN.


               

Time Morphing


               

Film Morphing

See also:  -[Film elements]-