As I try to lower the pile of NY Review of Books, I came across an article by Dan Chiasson on the John Serio edition of Wallace Stevens Selected Poems. He quotes the following from "Description Without Place":
Description is revelation. It is not
The thing described, nor false
It is an artificial thing that exists,
In its own seeming, plainly
Yet not too closely the double of
Intenser than any actual life could
It struck me that these words might describe a landscape painting. A painting is not what it depicts, but it is not false for that, but, though a painting allows one to reflect and imagine, could it be more intense than what it depicts? Maybe in the sense that it might be easier to revisit the image than the actual place. The image can also have more emotional meaning captured by the artist.