The Idea of Order at Key West (pt. 2)

The last class discussion surrounding The Idea of Order at Key West focused predominantly on the woman’s use of language to create meaning in ways that cannot be replicated by human-less nature.  The discussion promoted authorship and human creation as powerful and more capable of revealing the essence of a thing than nature without human interaction.  Furthermore, when discussing the best way to portray Key West, the class found that representations involving human conception might have a more powerful influence on the interpreter’s ability to understand the moment at the sea.

If we are aiming to understand the moment at sea felt by a human, then perhaps the painting or creative illustrations are most useful.  However, is this what we always strive to do?  Is the emphasis on authorship vital to understanding the essence of a thing or merely a moment to be shared by people?  Why is it that the human element breathes life into meaning?  Is it just that the tools used to create meaning are more familiar than the raw elements seen in nature and in turn make more sense to us?  Is there not an additional imagination factor that invites the reader to use creativity in the interpretation of meaning?  When telling someone about Key West through a painting, the emotional experience of the creator is intrinsically woven into the work.  However, does this make the piece more interesting or vital to connecting one human to the work?  Is there any merit in the reader’s response to raw nature, regardless of whether the familiar language we use to communicate is absent?