|
Post by dradtke on Sept 8, 2014 12:25:57 GMT -5
The problem I have with Pollock (overly simplified for the sake of a forum post) is that he told the same joke over and over and over again. We got it the first time. The problems I have with Kinkade are too many to enumerate here. Offhand you could say Kinkade told the same joke over and over and over again, too.
|
|
|
Post by millring on Sept 8, 2014 12:41:11 GMT -5
The problem I have with Pollock (overly simplified for the sake of a forum post) is that he told the same joke over and over and over again. We got it the first time. The problems I have with Kinkade are too many to enumerate here. Offhand you could say Kinkade told the same joke over and over and over again, too. Yeah, but then I'd just be paraphrasing Russell.
|
|
|
Post by patrick on Sept 8, 2014 12:48:38 GMT -5
Offhand you could say Kinkade told the same joke over and over and over again, too. Yeah, but then I'd just be paraphrasing Russell. As long as you call it an "homage" (and you gotta say it with a snotty French accent) its OK.
|
|
|
Post by millring on Sept 8, 2014 13:00:16 GMT -5
EOOOU-mahjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjjj
|
|
|
Post by Russell Letson on Sept 8, 2014 13:39:08 GMT -5
The problems I have with Kinkade are too many to enumerate here. I'm enumerate and it's caused me more problems than I can count, especially at tax time. (That's why we hired an accountant.) Kinkade, on the other hand, was a no-account who probably needed the services of a whole slew of accountants.
|
|
|
Post by brucemacneill on Sept 8, 2014 13:55:14 GMT -5
If it ain't a nude woman, it's not "Art". There, fixed it for you.
|
|
|
Post by Russell Letson on Sept 8, 2014 14:12:03 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by patrick on Sept 8, 2014 15:59:10 GMT -5
See, that's what happens when you hold the bow backwards.
|
|
|
Post by Cornflake on Sept 8, 2014 19:08:11 GMT -5
I think the word "art" is useless and I avoid it. To creative people who stray far from the middle of the road, I give my thanks, often my attention and always a lot of slack. To people who stay near the middle of the road, I give polite applause at best. It takes courage to risk failure and you have to risk failure to avoid plowing the same old furrows. I've never had enough courage in any of my creative endeavors. But I can put aside my preconceptions, go to a museum and have fun seeing what human creativity has come up with.
|
|
|
Post by Lonnie on Sept 8, 2014 19:42:21 GMT -5
Art can be well or badly made, repulsive or inspirational, complex and subtle or flat and blatant, self-referential or outward-looking, propagandistic or detached, popular or hermetic. . . . Maybe that's why my CDs aren't selling like the proverbial hotcake. I think rather than shrink-wrapped, they were hermetically sealed.
|
|
|
Post by millring on Sept 9, 2014 5:57:30 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by millring on Sept 9, 2014 9:07:05 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by millring on Sept 9, 2014 9:21:57 GMT -5
I think that when folks want to sound all non-judgemental, open-minded, erudite, progressive, artsy and stuff, they say things like "I just go to the museum and enjoy the unbounded human creativity" (or some similar sentiment). I'm GUESSING what they are envisioning when they make such statements is that they would work as a caption under the likes of: "I just go to the museum and enjoy the unbounded human creativity"
What I doubt they are meaning is that one could feel free to assume their sentiment would work equally well as a caption for the likes of: "I just go to the museum and enjoy the unbounded human creativity"
....though quite often the sentiment is being made in order to express intellectual superiority, and a more winsome and less judgmental character -- and as a rebuttal and rebuke to those who have in mind some art along the lines of the latter image, not the former.
|
|
|
Post by Russell Letson on Sept 9, 2014 11:35:42 GMT -5
Or maybe it means, "I walk through the galleries enjoying what I enjoy and not-enjoying what I find enigmatic or offensive or stupid." Which is where we all start with pictures and statues and music and attractive members of the opposite sex. There are certainly ways of processing and elaborating those initial responses that lead to showing off or putting down or kidding oneself or other social and psychological behaviors.
My late mother had two kinds of things she would say about objects that seemed to demand an evaluative/aesthetic response: "That's pretty/cute" or "That took a lot of work." The former, of course, was her unfiltered aesthetic reaction, while the latter was evidence that she didn't really get the point of the thing but recognized that it was being presented to her as an art/craft object.
Actually, I'm oversimplifying Ma's range of responses. To the eviscerated stuffed monkey she would have said, "That's awful" or "Why would anybody do that?" or maybe even "That's just stupid." And while she did not generally talk about it, I know that her use of Catholic devotional art was to see through the image to its subject--in this context, the most mawkish holy-card-style Sacred Heart was not much different from the very fine Greek-Orthodox-icon-style Jesus I had a friend make for her. Subject trumped craft in that area.
|
|
|
Post by millring on Sept 9, 2014 12:39:23 GMT -5
Or maybe it means, "I walk through the galleries enjoying what I enjoy and not-enjoying what I find enigmatic or offensive or stupid." Which is where we all start with pictures and statues and music and attractive members of the opposite sex. There are certainly ways of processing and elaborating those initial responses that lead to showing off or putting down or kidding oneself or other social and psychological behaviors. My late mother had two kinds of things she would say about objects that seemed to demand an evaluative/aesthetic response: "That's pretty/cute" or "That took a lot of work." The former, of course, was her unfiltered aesthetic reaction, while the latter was evidence that she didn't really get the point of the thing but recognized that it was being presented to her as an art/craft object. Actually, I'm oversimplifying Ma's range of responses. To the eviscerated stuffed monkey she would have said, "That's awful" or "Why would anybody do that?" or maybe even "That's just stupid." And while she did not generally talk about it, I know that her use of Catholic devotional art was to see through the image to its subject--in this context, the most mawkish holy-card-style Sacred Heart was not much different from the very fine Greek-Orthodox-icon-style Jesus I had a friend make for her. Subject trumped craft in that area. My point was that we most often sound like we disagree when in fact we aren't talking about the same objects. If we were, in fact, talking about the same objects, we would probably find that we all react pretty much the same, or at least, much closer to the same.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2014 15:26:02 GMT -5
Zogg finally read all pages. (Have to use three caves, find enough walls for whole thing. Need find smaller font, or lots more ochre and charcoal.) No get big hoohah. Picture guy show how hunt aurochs. If picture no look like aurochs, hunter try kill sabertooth instead. Sabertooth eat hunter. Hunter widow club bad picture maker over head. Next picture guy look closer, paint better. Problem solved.
|
|
|
Post by millring on Sept 9, 2014 15:37:30 GMT -5
Zogg know his art.
|
|
|
Post by dradtke on Sept 9, 2014 16:13:53 GMT -5
Seems to me Zogg might have liked the eviscerated monkey.
|
|
|
Post by millring on Sept 9, 2014 16:30:21 GMT -5
Seem to me Zogg like eviscerated monkey.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 9, 2014 17:41:15 GMT -5
Seems to me like Zogg might have eviscerated the monkey.
|
|