Forgive me for my empty comment, that was a bit of a mistake on my part. Now, onto the actual review. Let's see if we can't bring this out of the Green Room, shall we?
"Peter Booth was worn during WWII and moved to Australia when he was 18"
Born, not worn.
"anxiety’s, dreams and experiences."
I think you want anxieties in there, not anxiety's.
"Booth refuses to give tittles to his works with them simply titles by the year it was made."
Titles, not tittles.
"Booths privet world of night mares and epileptic visions."
Private, not privet. Also, nightmares is the proper term here.
"along the path were a pale middle aged man with white hair"
Since this is singular, you should use 'was'.
"Booths figure has evil, red eyes that are similar and point to the eyes of a vampire, could the city be aflame because of one man and his thirst for blood having ended an entire civilisation?"
While I like the sentiment here, I think you should separate the two clauses to let the sentence breathe..
"hile the silver Pitbull trailing him is scene keeping its distance could represent loyalty"
Seen, not scene.
"The figure could be seen as booth who has turned to the dark side in his grief and now walks alone"
Capitalize the name.
Now, onto the more substantial portion of this review.
A) I liked how you actually gave an analysis of the work, pointing out its elements and giving ideas of what they might mean. Personally, I think Booth might really have been inspired by Van Gogh, as the painting is reminiscent of that style. I do think you could expand a little more, though--for example, the city in the side looks very significant as well, ominous and looming in the distance. How do you know that the city is burning when it could just as easily be gleaming with electric light? Or perhaps it's both. Maybe Booth is trying to state that he can no longer tell the difference between a shining and a burning city, the golden age and the fall of a civilization. Or perhaps the white light outlining the mountains in the distance, is that simply a boundary or does it mean a little more than that? This is from someone who is unfamiliar with Peter Booth's work, so please forgive me if I seem ignorant whenever I'm throwing these predictions, but I do still think you could expand more on this.
B) From the looks of it you may have written this interpretation by taking some examples from other interpreters. If that is the case, I suggest you cite their analysis, even if you're just paraphrasing what they're saying. It's always worth giving credit where credit is due, and besides, if anyone wants to know more they can go to those sources as well.
That's all I have for now. Great analysis, and sorry this has been in the green room for a while now.
Signing out,
--EM.
Points: 19607
Reviews: 383
Donate