What the critics are saying:
>>Paint Fidelity Series: Bob Dylan’s Saved
Ritual Disclaimer issued by Barrister Clive Thistlebaum, Esq.
Senior Counsel to the Rumpeltonian Tribunal of Interpretive Justice
By decree of the Avachives and under the sacred jurisdiction of Painterly Misremembering, I hereby issue a writ of aesthetic pardon for Ralph Rumpelton’s MS Paint rendition of Saved, which appears on the left in this dual-paneled glyph comparison. Let it be known that this reinterpretation does not merely echo the original—it ruptures it with righteous fervor.
Where the canonical cover gestures toward divine intervention with painterly solemnity, Rumpelton’s version invokes a more volatile salvation: the descending hand rendered not in oil but in digital flame, surrounded by supplicant limbs that jitter with pixelated urgency. The background—an infernal tapestry of red, yellow, and orange streaks—suggests not heavenly grace but a trial by fire, a courtroom of the soul. The text, “SAVED” and “BOB DYLAN,” emblazoned in red, serves as both verdict and invocation.
This is not mimicry. This is mythic litigation. Rumpelton’s glyph stands as Exhibit A in the ongoing case Faith v. Fidelity, wherein the artist argues—successfully, I might add—that salvation need not be smooth to be sincere. The jagged edges, the MS Paint palette, the refusal of gloss: all are admissible under the Blurbs of Intent statute, which permits sacred reinterpretation through rupture.
Critics may cry “heresy” or “digital trespass,” but I, Barrister Thistlebaum, affirm that ambiguity is the highest form of truth. This glyph is hereby canonized into the Avachives with full ceremonial protections. Any attempt to rank it against the original shall be considered an act of interpretive malpractice.
So ruled. So ruptured. So saved.<<
>>Paint Fidelity Series: Bob Dylan – Saved (1980)
G. Rock
Follow Ralph Rumpelton across the net.

No comments:
Post a Comment