I'd like to borrow a little davidjackson quote, and then disagree.
"And on the other hand we have the "esoteric" manuscripts, which are simply authors who are literate but have no official training from the scribal houses. And these are the scribblers who develop imagery according to their own whims, who have never been taught how to do things properly."
They may know how to do things properly, but they may communicate them in an idiosyncratic manner. They may understand heraldry but use it in an unexpected language. They may construct an illustrated pun, but without papelonny, you will miss it. To me, this demonstrates the author's mastery of elements and the ability to do a sort of slight-of-hand trick that can not be seen. The information has been placed in the illustration. The failure is in the interpretation of subtle details presented.
Not only are the illustrations difficult to interpret because information (like papelonny and gurges and the nebuly line) has been lost to obscurity, they are also made difficult by obfuscation. Some of it was intentional; some was historical. The repeated confirmational factors presented are based on objective placement and the traditional standards of church hierarchy and heraldry. It is the tradition of the red galero that originated with a Fieschi pope. And it is indeed disguised. It opens a hidden pathway. It remains a current tradition. How outlandish does it get??
"And on the other hand we have the "esoteric" manuscripts, which are simply authors who are literate but have no official training from the scribal houses. And these are the scribblers who develop imagery according to their own whims, who have never been taught how to do things properly."
They may know how to do things properly, but they may communicate them in an idiosyncratic manner. They may understand heraldry but use it in an unexpected language. They may construct an illustrated pun, but without papelonny, you will miss it. To me, this demonstrates the author's mastery of elements and the ability to do a sort of slight-of-hand trick that can not be seen. The information has been placed in the illustration. The failure is in the interpretation of subtle details presented.
Not only are the illustrations difficult to interpret because information (like papelonny and gurges and the nebuly line) has been lost to obscurity, they are also made difficult by obfuscation. Some of it was intentional; some was historical. The repeated confirmational factors presented are based on objective placement and the traditional standards of church hierarchy and heraldry. It is the tradition of the red galero that originated with a Fieschi pope. And it is indeed disguised. It opens a hidden pathway. It remains a current tradition. How outlandish does it get??