This may stir up a bit of a debate amongst the readers of this blog. That’s fine, because it’s good to get some lively discussion going and to hear and read differing opinions. Therefore, if everyone’s sat comfortably, I reckon I’ll launch straight into this.
Quite often, having sight is taken for granted. Let’s face it, the immediacy of being able to see things, to look at something, to work a puzzle out by seeing its component parts or simply judging a person by the way they smile or frown is very easy. The use of the other sense is mostly understated because the immediate availability of being able to see something provides the information that is needed. Understandably, being able to see colours, to look at flowers or to enjoy a panoramic scenery is a wonderful thing, but do we judge the book of sight too much by its cover?
Whereas sight can provide the colours, images and shapes of a picture, senses such as hearing, taste or smell give it a deeper and more meaningful context.
For example, if you meet a person who doesn’t smile or wear a colour that is to your liking, does this automatically put you off that person? By talking and listening to them, you may find that they are the opposite of what you see. Additionally, you may look at a plate of food and be put immediately off by its colour or texture. However, by not tasting it, are you missing out on something quite nice and delicious?
It’s crucial to realise that our other senses are important and that they do help to from more substantial contexts; a fuller depiction of life. Using the examples given above, can you think of any situations where the other senses give more vigour to a visual landscape?
To many who lose sight, there is nothing equal to replace it. This must be fully recognised, but the use of other senses does help to give alternative colour to the things that surround us.
Please feel free to join in this discussion.