fused metaphors vs. scenes

the adamsmorioka blog post differentiates between two methods for communicating ideas. one of these methods is the idea of scenes, the default understanding for how we consume culture and observe the world around us. scenes include a setting, characters or objects, potential action, sights/sounds/smells/tastes/etc. to present an idea in this manner falls comfortably into our natural understanding and thus, challenges nothing. it has a time and a place and it's static. another option for expression is through the "fused metaphor," the taking of things and juxtaposing them as pure idea, pure concept, and demanding that the viewers step up to the plate and interpret it themselves, because nobody is going to be feeding them the answer. this has the potential to be much more dynamic, much more powerful and meaningful, as well as formally and conceptually stronger, and the removal of the flat, earthly context lends the imagery a sort of universal or theoretical aspect that heightens its importance in a way that, buried in the real world, can't be done.