Lily love

My two fans know that I've made no secret of my love of pattern and symmetry. It's probably connected with the obsessive part of my OLF self, but noticing patterns pleases my brain. Especially, oddly enough considering what I just said, when what initially seems to be a simple pattern is broken up by chance or some factor unknown to the quick glance into something that appears to be much more random... and then, upon closer examination, turns out to be a more complex pattern rather than an accident.

Yeah, I like fractals. And Lichtenberg figures (although, obviously not the struck by lightning part. I wouldn't like that at all). And the branching patterns in leaves, in case the pointless photography found here hasn't made that terribly clear already.

You'll notice that I said that I love pattern and symmetry above. Patterns don't have to be symmetrical to attract my attention, but I'll admit that a good bit of apparent symmetry certainly catches my eye.

Apparent symmetry, yes. A lot of the symmetry that we think we see out there isn't. Case in point? Us. I've brought this up before, but our apparent symmetry (which really isn't symmetry at all. We're all lopsided, whether we want to see it or not) is only skin deep. A quick look at our internal workings is enough to show that the outside appearance is all ha ha fooled you. There's barely a damned thing symmetrical about us at all.

I'm so distracting myself from my point. Ah... good, then. I guess that means that things are headed back to normal on the blog for a bit. And, of course, that the blog won't turn into a pumpkin, which is exactly what will happen if it ever comes to a point.

Either that, or the second coming.

Um, anyway. I was headed to lilies, I think. Judging from the photos and the post title, at least.

I like lilies. Members of the lily family have always had an attraction for me, especially when it comes to drawing. The clean, bold lines, the simple symmetry...

Apparent simple symmetry...

See? I got myself back on track.

It's not nearly as simple as it looks, my friend. Six simple petals in a basic radial symmetry? No way. To begin with, three petals.

Yep.

Three petals, three sepals. If they weren't flower-coloured, you'd be able to tell a lot easier that those bottom three "petals" were actually the covers that were protecting the flower before it opened. The outside of the bud, as it were. In a lot of plants, the sepals are green and form sort of a ring at the base of the flower. Here, they become a part of things, colour and all. We call all the members -- petals and sepals -- tepals when that happens.

I know, who really cares if they're petals or not? Botanists. And anal-retentives, I guess. And people who like it when things aren't as simple as they first appear.

I like being surprised by nature.

Although I can't quite figure out the surprise of the flower in the bottom photo deciding to grow along the ground instead of standing upright. It's a healthy plant; just has a prostrate stem. Bend over by something early in the growing season, I suppose. Not that it matters.

Just like sepals and petals? Yeah, in the end I guess that's right. It's not going to change my interest in finding out that things aren't really as they might seem, though. There's too much of a cool factor in it for me.

And that makes me happy.





And now? Well, now that I have some new reference photos I should probably get off my lazy behind and... erm... back on my lazy behind and draw a lily. It has been pretty much sheer laziness lately, the lack of drawing. I get that way sometimes.

Kind of like with blogging. I'll try to do better this week.