response to aurora on time and art

the ed hopper exhibit you saw sounds enthralling - i think the fact that he could paint as well as temporate is a pretty astonishing feat.

i think your take on impressionism is interesting. the impression obviously differs with the impressionist; a vase of orchids will look different to each viewer, and each viewer also has different skills and modes, so between these two differences there exists a whole range of possibilities, which probably one of the contributing factors as to how the impressionist movement was able to thrive the way it did.

other forms absolutely capture time. hopper's piece probably is an anomaly amongst the visual arts in that he was able to implement the passing of time in the art itself, if i interpreted correctly. music captures time via the verse-chorus-verse-chorus-bridge-chorus structure, or whatever structure the musician chooses. the repetition acts sort of as an artistic stopwatch or something? dance, though, does it the best, out of the mediums that you listed. you can watch the direction of the movement, compare it with the last 10 seconds of dance, and watch the forms progress/digress/disappear/appear.

is there another format that more purely captures the passage of time? literature? the pyramids?! frank lloyd wright played with light and the sun's path through heaven in his architecture, you should definitely check it out.