Disturbing satan painting in courthouse

reply to post by Slave NO MORE



Yeah we have pictures of the devil in every court room here in AUS. She lives at Buckingham palace

reply to post by sputniksteve


Yes You are right - The hand gesture is like George Bush (Skull and Bones) and others use
Whether it pertains to Skull and Bones I cannot say
Some say it is Satanic as it represents the horns of Satan or the Devil

Everything good gets corrupted and good becomes bad - How can Bush or Blair for example call themselves Christian.
One Man reads the Bible and finds reason to hate and kill in the name of their God as do other Religions.
All claim to have God on their side.

Justice becomes punishment and revenge for those that break the rules of the status quo.
In medieval times the hands were cut of children who stole a loaf of bread because they were hungry.

I read the other day a Man was imprisoned for collecting rain water

This painting takes a side swipe at Hypocricy
Thing is many Hypocrites brag of their transgressions against their fellow beings
They rub it in our face and laugh thinking us dumb sheep







i

Snow white is originally black haired...it caused her to look more pale than other people ("snow white")
I was her for halloween a few years ago that makes me an expert lol

Originally posted by Amanda5
Has anyone studied the floor depicted in the artwork? The floor is the black and white chequerboard favoured by the cabal/illuminati/whatever. The cabal/illuminati/whatever utilise it as a symbol of their presence.

The black and white squares symbolise good and evil and the game/playing board represents the game being played out on earth. Conduct your own research if you have trouble understanding - that's how I came across the information I am now sharing.

As for the artwork and artist - could be that the artist is a cabal/illuminati/whatever member or was commissioned by the cabal/illuminati/whatever who made requests of what was depicted in the artwork....

Just my thoughts - oh I noticed that Snow White is depicted as a redhead when I thought she was a Blonde????!!! And only three of the Dwarves - where are the rest????

Much Peace...

They wouldn't have that in L.A. because there are boobies! Pornography lol

reply to post by Slave NO MORE


dont know how this is satanic.. just cos hes got horns

Originally posted by Slave NO MORE
reply to post by Char-Lee

 

The cover of both books says: "regelrecht" which in english means: "directly"

...or maybe "Proper" / "Real" / "Downright".

reply to post by severdsoul

Congratulations. I looked closely at all the responses here so far and yours is the only one that saw the hidden images of faces, animals, devils and such covering this painting. Look at the enlargment in the OP's link and you can clearly see the background of ghostly images.




Poor girl. She sits naked before the court (the harsh glare of light), in the clutches of the prosecution and the defense. One is a clown, the other a devil (which is which?). Her look is both resigned and bemused at the same time. Both sides read from the book of law but really, the whole proceeding is a sham (these days). In her mind she sees herself as innocent (Snow White) and surely to be in debt from it all (dwarves song, I Owe I Owe].

Just observing...

well comming from and art background, and visiting all over northern europe esp. AMSTERDAMN!! lol they view art much differently and you can find all kinds of crazy different types of art, i walked into a public library and there was a painting of a naked man holding some kind of dog with his giant wang hangin out best part is, on the way out my friend noticed it was in the childrens section !! haha it was AWESOME lol not to mention all the walkay posts in amsterdamn are replicas of the penis, in other parts we saw painting with upside down crosses and they were in churches what is up with that lols its pretty safe to say you will see unusual art in weird/common places

It doesn't seem all that disturbing.

reply to post by Slave NO MORE

Disturbing? The disturbing thing is finding art disturbing, it aroused emotion, like all good art is supposed to do. The feelings you have of art is something to self analyse and wonder, why some pigment on a canvas provoked whatever emotion inside yourself. It is a mistake to look for representation or what the artist could have possibly meant and why it's hanging in a court house.

Congratulations, you now know how to look at art, the only way you'll ever understand it though; is to look within to see what you're trying to paint over what you're looking at.

Originally posted by BigBrotherDarkness

Disturbing? The disturbing thing is finding art disturbing, it aroused emotion, like all good art is supposed to do.

Personally, I'm a little tired of "artists" from every background/industry using shock value in an attempt to get attention or get noticed. That I find disturbing. Any true message or meaning is generally lost these days because of it, if there ever was any to begin with.

The whole notion that negative attention is better than no attention at all is getting old.

reply to post by Deetermined

I don't know why you're quoting me, because you totally missed the point of my post. It could be a painting of a flower that stops you in your tracks and makes you feel. The importance of the imagery is personal, like the smell of cookies associated with a memory. You are what gives meaning to whatever it is you are looking at, trying to find a paintings meaning from anyone else is a sad state of affairs. I don't find it over the top or out there, by any means...I know the reasons why because I know what the imagery means to myself personally.

Seeing other peoples emotions come out in all sorts of directions is as interesting; as seeing the results of a rorschach test, actually more interesting to me than the painting itself.

Originally posted by BigBrotherDarkness
reply to post by Deetermined

 

I don't know why you're quoting me, because you totally missed the point of my post. It could be a painting of a flower that stops you in your tracks and makes you feel. The importance of the imagery is personal, like the smell of cookies associated with a memory. You are what gives meaning to whatever it is you are looking at, trying to find a paintings meaning from anyone else is a sad state of affairs. I don't find it over the top or out there, by any means...I know the reasons why because I know what the imagery means to myself personally.

I didn't miss the point of your post, it's just that your first sentence provoked a thought and I went with it.

Like you said, it's all about perception. You may think it's a sad state of affairs to try and find a painting's meaning from the artist, but in reality, the artist is really the only one that holds any meaning to that painting, as they were the one who painted it. Precisely why I could really care less about anyone's art, as I don't appreciate most of it, but if others do, so be it. Unlike you, I do find this particular piece "over the top" like most everything else I see around me today. I feel like it represents the current state of mind of most people today.

Seeing other peoples emotions come out in all sorts of directions is as interesting; as seeing the results of a rorschach test, actually more interesting to me than the painting itself.

I find it interesting too. I love seeing how others perceive things and how their minds work. Definitely more interesting than the painting as I'm more intrigued by people than art.

I especially love how most people perceived this painting as a mockery to the justice system even though it's hanging in a courthouse.

Originally posted by snewpers
reply to post by coyote66

 

.
'Regelrecht' in Dutch does mean 'directly' or 'straight'...

'Regelrecht naar de hel' would translate to 'Straight to hell'.

Sometimes words cannot be translated one on one.
.

Ah I thought it was in German. I dont speak Dutch, so I wouldnt know further.

Originally posted by knightwhosaysnih
reply to post by Slave NO MORE

 

dont know how this is satanic.. just cos hes got horns

Use common sense, then.

TY for this great painting!

reply to post by Slave NO MORE


The subject of the painting doesn't appeal to me in the slightest.
The skill of the artist, on the other hand, very much does. He has a most fine touch.

I haven't read through the pages of this thread yet (only looked at OP) but I bet that I will not be the first person to bring up the 'art' that is showcased in Denver Airport after looking at this image.

Denver Airport, now that is some disturbing ****!!!

reply to post by Slave NO MORE


Wow, thanks for posting this! I found myself coming back to the large image of this painting
repeatedly this afternoon, each time to see what new meaning I might find in it.
Here's what I see in it, based on my own personal interpretation, & the fact that someone
saw enough in this painting to decide that it belonged hanging in a courthouse hallway:

The 2 figures to either side of the woman appear to me to be 2 facets of the same concept.
Note the similar hats & collars worn by both; the shadows cast by the hats are especially
similar in appearance. The horned man could be a representation of Nature in the form of Pan,
complete with a rulebook on the laws of Nature. The man on our right could represent Civilization (or the civilizing of ourselves as we mature), complete with a rulebook of the laws created by society in an attempt to bring order against the more freewheeling natural impulses we all have.

The woman wears a mask, to me signifying that she has taken on her adult identity, largely
a construct based on the person she believes she should be, & possibly not who she
actually is. The mask, IMO, can serve to conceal who she truly is to herself as well as
to others. The man on our right wears a stiff, formal face, an artificial construct representing
the "proper" behavior in society. I see him as more of a harlequin (a type of clown), but
with much more of his "humanity" showing through the makeup than is usual. Pan, as a
force of Nature, wears no mask. He just is.

The dolls on the top shelf of the closet signify that though this woman has put away the
childlike part of herself, the self closer to nature, she is still very much in possession of her
"inner child". The fact that she is nude under a failing attempt at concealment suggests that
her true self is visible to both male figures, & to us, who view the painting. Pan's outfit
suggests that our natural origins can still communicate with us in more modern times. The
bare chest & stomach of the other male figure suggest to me the human-designed &
oriented origins of our current legal system.

Pan is assuring the woman that it's okay to yield to her natural impulses, quoting from his
rule book & making the sign of the horns, a traditional way to ward off harmful influences,
as he does so. His closeness with her suggests this woman's close ties to her natural
origin, & the associated power of her natural drives, instincts, & emotions. Note the
alignment of the feet of both Pan & the woman; their legs may be crossed, suggesting
some separation, but their feet tell another story. She is very much under his influence!

Now we come to the part that suggests to me what allowed this painting to end up hanging
where it is: the figure representing the laws of society recognizes what is happening,
acknowledging the woman's (or our) close ties to her natural impulses, instincts, etc, but
stands by to offer a steadying hand on her shoulder against any possible "improper"
(illegal) behavior on her part, brought on by the admittedly powerful influence of her true
nature.

I think the artist chose a woman as the subject of attention between the other 2 figures to
enable more of a sense of a seducer on one side of her, & a guardian on the other, in
whoever views the painting. While the same idea may work with 2 women to either side of a
man, I think the woman as the subject inspires more natural concern in a wider audience, &
in turn more involvement in trying to determine what's being portrayed.

Thanks not only to the OP for posting this fascinating work, but also to those who proposed translations for the titles of the books, which helped me to form my ideas on the message behind the symbolism.

reply to post by BuzzCory

Thanks for your very succinct; personal interpretation. Admittedly, I am curious as to how your interpretation would change, if I suggested that the female in the figure might be a representation of Justice, given what you have already said? My curiosity has been peaked because, my personal interpretation is not all that dissimilar to yours, until I added Justice as the intended personification of the female...but it adds a certain je ne sais quoi when I add my conceptional ideas of Justice to the female character. Please take your time if you care to look from that angle and reinterpret. I'll add mine some time tomorrow if you're curious for another interpretation.