UFO Conjecture(s)

Tuesday, March 06, 2012

Again, why cave art, and did other-worldly agents bring it about?

Copyright 2012, InterAmerica, Inc.

Secrets of the Ice Age: The World of the Cave Artists by Evan Hadingham [Walker and Company, NY, 1979], pictured above, makes clear that no one knows, for sure, why primitive mankind painted on cave walls or produced stone art.

And some cave art is not representational such as this abstract rendering from Abri Leuillet in the Paris Basin, dating from the Neolithic period:

Page 285

Mr. Hardingham presents the mystery of why art seems to have waned after the Ice Age:

Page 267

The idea that cave art was totemic in nature, or created for magical rituals is wrong, writes Mr. Hadingham.

Of course, there are some totemic drawings, just as there depictions of a sexual nature or hunting scenes.

And the idea that such art stemmed from a leisure, art-for-arts sake has been discounted also.

Why do I persist in presenting the cave art scenarios here?

I think that something happened that encouraged the primitive or aboriginal mind, as was the case on Easter Island; that is, either paranormal, extraterrestrial, or supernatural (an intrusion by divinity) agents instigated or sparked such art, maybe by just being present.

And UFOs or other-worldly beings played a controlling part in this esthetic turn by early mankind, which disappeared for a while to show up at the outset of the Sumerian/Egyptian cultural beginnings.

But if “outside” agents brought on the creativity, why didn’t it continue in an overt form?

Also, there is no and has been no overt esthetic thrusts or evidence of such artistic endeavors by those beings encountered in UFO events of the modern era.

Beings imagined or real, encountered by humans, have been unique in their unesthetic contact.

Was the artistic spark lit long ago and left to geminate on its own?

Did the gods or ET infuse humankind with an artistic DNA factor and then let it fester on its own, and if so, why?

Or is an outside agent needed at all?

What caused early man (and modern man) to draw (or paint)?

Do we need an outside source as an explanation?

Even the Ancient Astronaut theorists are loath to wax enthusiastically about aliens inculcating art among their processes for humanity’s “evolution,” pressing the alleged primitive technological and/or architectural input.

But there’s more here….something not quite right, about early mankind’s sophisticated approach to rendering pictograms when writing and speaking were hardly developed,

And is there a UFO tie-in?



  • What did they make of dreams in relation to a waking state? Were the two on a equal footing in terms of their cogency? I think so in terms of human expression. In relation to art in mimicking nature (as a tool wielding creature) manipulating materials to create images frozen in time by memory, which may have been an evolutionary benchmark as a precursor to formal hieroglyphs or cuneiform. Images and imagination in art is inseparable unless you are an art critic. The formalization of images followed. I think our ancestors required expression of what was on their minds as much as we do now as to what we see only their tools were less sophisticated. There is no jump start in this by way of ET except by the same art of images linked to imagination.

    By Blogger Bruce Duensing, at Tuesday, March 06, 2012  

  • There is, Bruce, a neurological spurt of some kind that induces one to create....art or whatever.

    Freud's sublimation hypothesis doesn't cut it for me, although I understand how it works for neo-Victorian cultures such as those of Vienna or Britain in the 1800s.

    But primitive man wasn't repressed, and prone to real survival needs during the Ice Age and before/after.

    So why paint? When tool development was basic, not near as sophisticated as the art, how and why did the art become so hefty?

    Cogency in art but not cogency in the wheel, or farming techniques?

    Something doesn't compute, as you might say.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Tuesday, March 06, 2012  

  • Pardon the clichéd ‘when I was a lad’ analogy, but it helps to make sense of the transitions we’ve gone through in terms of expression of perception and self-awareness. Here goes…

    I remember painting a picture at infant school at around 5/6 years old. It’s one of those memories that has retained its clarity over the years. The picture was typical with a house, hills on the horizon and a blue sky. As I was painting a blue line across the top of the picture (the sky), I became aware that to represent the sky meant painting *all* of the sky and not just that band across the top. I was a kid and decided the effort was too much…

    We’d call the moment an epiphany.

    As humanity has passed through these watershed moments of art and technology, I tend to think that a collective epiphany plays its part.

    On an individual scale, the first member of a group to depict images of animals and people would be imitated by others until they all recognised the symbols as human and animal. By increments, the two-dimensional renderings became more sophisticated until they were creating some of the more three-dimensional artwork like those in the caves at Chauvet. Step by step they passed through their ‘blue sky’ epiphanies.

    Maybe a better example is that early hominid who cracked a rock, looked at the edge and realised how bloody useful it might be.

    Our own native intelligence can account for the developments and epiphanies in much simpler ways than attributing our achievements to the Folk from Elsewhere. I believe it’s individual creativity harnessed to practical goals that holds the answers. Even if we look at the crows dropping nuts under car wheels or chimps using tools, it’s always the bright individual who has original ideas that spread through populations.

    The Eureka Moments are all ours.

    By Blogger Kandinsky, at Tuesday, March 06, 2012  

  • I'd like to agree with you Kandinsky, however....I can't, exactly.

    The idea that someone had an epiphany that spread like a virus, around the world, in a designated time-frame, as Hadingham (among others) points out is a bit of a stretch for me.

    The DNA interference is easier for me to accept, or the immaterial aspects of evolution as recounted in that book by du Nouy I keep touting here: Human Destiny.

    But yours is a possibility, surely, and in light of your own epiphany, when a lad, palpable it seems.

    I raised the question via my post because we don't have a definitive answer or conjecture.

    And I just wanted an excuse to mention more about cave art.


    By Blogger RRRGroup, at Tuesday, March 06, 2012  

  • Shamanistic rituals with entheogens could explain why early man might feel compelled to illustrate what he sees in altered states as perhaps a record of the event.
    If McKenna, Strassman, Hancock et al. are correct, that interaction with the entity(ies) could be the other-worldly agent that is responsible for our early evolution.
    Might we also connect mans use of altered states to the whole ancient aliens question? I'm seeming to go down the road of "Interactions with our consciousness" as an explanation for most paranormal events, mad as that sounds outside of the paranormal community.
    So no, No "nuts and Bolts" for me, thanks.

    By Blogger Mike Church, at Friday, March 16, 2012  

Post a Comment

<< Home