|
Post by JayUtah on Dec 12, 2007 2:03:06 GMT -4
A problem, I think, with classifying art as subjective is that [it] overlooks the actual learned skill and natural talent of the artist...Absolutely. The subjective argument leads to the fallacy, "My kid could paint that." Your kid might have been able to paint my tryptich here. i149.photobucket.com/albums/s71/clavius_examples/sm-tree-tryptich.jpg But I doubt it. In this sense, the artist is as objective as the bridge builder, [...] Nevertheless, artists do figure it all out and make it work.Yes. Despite its simple appearance, my tryptich's final appearance relies upon several sketches in which the composition was finalized. It required several more color sketches and some tests in order to achieve the chromatic effect. The majority of the hues are ruthlessly complementary, with chromaticity and value kept constant. The artist has the task of manipulating the properties of the physical universe to create an experience for someone who isn't skilled himself in the manipulation. Mastery of perception and motor techniques and the nature of human experience are required whether one's art is representational or not. An artist knows that orange landscape will work, before he picks up the brush. The viewer might not know why. H.R. Giger is a good artist to study for this point. His images are disturbing and distasteful to some. But his skill with an airbrush and his ability to depict a vision are unmatched, even if one does not aesthetically agree with what one sees. The debate on the nature of art remains a great debate precisely because it defies such easy classification.
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Dec 12, 2007 11:59:05 GMT -4
Art is such a wonderful topic. I took my then nine and ten year old children to a Cy Twombly exhibit at the Museum of Fine Arts in Houston. The canvases were 10 foot tall pencil and crayon scribbles. The consensus was that any kid above kindergarten would fail art class if for turning in a similar painting for an assignment. We later went outside to the sculpture garden to do some art projects guided by practicing artist and students. The consensus among the artist I polled was that Twombly art was wonderful but there was no consistency in the reasons why. For the next year, when the kids didn’t want to do their homework, I would threaten to take them the Cy Twombly gallery here in town as punishment.
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Dec 12, 2007 12:01:55 GMT -4
Giger is the kind of guy who's artistic ability I can admire but I would never want to actually own any of his pieces.
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Dec 12, 2007 18:42:59 GMT -4
Hey, thats very nice work Jay. I love the simplicity of the shapes and brightness of the colours. What medium is it? Acrylic ? Oil? Is that a BLACK wall? May I make a suggestion to anyone posting artwork, or linking to it: It would be helpful if you stated the medium used and the size. I don't mean to minimize any aesthetic appreciation for the composition, but that information is very informative and interesting to me . If its no problem, that is.
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Dec 12, 2007 19:18:18 GMT -4
Art is such a wonderful topic. I took my then nine and ten year old children to a Cy Twombly exhibit at the Museum of Fine Arts in Houston. The canvases were 10 foot tall pencil and crayon scribbles. The consensus was that any kid above kindergarten would fail art class if for turning in a similar painting for an assignment. We later went outside to the sculpture garden to do some art projects guided by practicing artist and students. The consensus among the artist I polled was that Twombly art was wonderful but there was no consistency in the reasons why. For the next year, when the kids didn’t want to do their homework, I would threaten to take them the Cy Twombly gallery here in town as punishment. Just took a look at his work. I must say I'll never be a fan of his. While I don't know his intellectual approach to art, it must be that meeting with John Cage in the early fifties that twisted him so! ;D EDIT: And I never, never thought I would say this - but his art does look like your child could do it! Forgive me for saying those words...
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Dec 12, 2007 19:39:28 GMT -4
must be that meeting with John Cage in the early fifties that twisted him so! Both John Cage and the fifties did that to alot of people. I saw Cage and Karlheinz Stockhausen at performances in during the seventies. Both left me scared for life.
The most famous art patron in Houston, Dominique de Menil, whose husband was a founder of of Schlumberger, was quite smitten with him, providing the funds for the wonderful building that holds the best collection of his work. I just can't figure out why.
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Dec 12, 2007 20:00:18 GMT -4
Here's an early result of my Apollo 11 Launch. I consider it a study. Its very hard to paint because I used a used canvas, so application is difficult and frustrating. I'll probably buy a new canvas, maybe 20X20" and do it better. Medium: Acrylic Size: 10X10" i204.photobucket.com/albums/bb184/ginniegatrit/apollo11.jpgNote: The image is cropped because I couldn't fit it all on my scanner.
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Dec 13, 2007 8:51:07 GMT -4
The tryptich is a series of 4x6 inch panels, in acrylic. The wall isn't black; the panels are mounted on a much larger black board. But here I've used Photoshop to force the background to a pure black since black scans and photographs so poorly.
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Dec 13, 2007 17:04:23 GMT -4
The tryptich is a series of 4x6 inch panels, in acrylic. The wall isn't black; the panels are mounted on a much larger black board. But here I've used Photoshop to force the background to a pure black since black scans and photographs so poorly. See. that's why I like to know the size. I thought they were like 20X30" or something. So, like, you have a 18" high Stonehenge replica at home right?
|
|
reynoldbot
Jupiter
A paper-white mask of evil.
Posts: 790
|
Post by reynoldbot on Dec 15, 2007 3:58:51 GMT -4
Art is such a wonderful topic. I took my then nine and ten year old children to a Cy Twombly exhibit at the Museum of Fine Arts in Houston. The canvases were 10 foot tall pencil and crayon scribbles. The consensus was that any kid above kindergarten would fail art class if for turning in a similar painting for an assignment. We later went outside to the sculpture garden to do some art projects guided by practicing artist and students. The consensus among the artist I polled was that Twombly art was wonderful but there was no consistency in the reasons why. For the next year, when the kids didn’t want to do their homework, I would threaten to take them the Cy Twombly gallery here in town as punishment. I saw that gallery too and was not too impressed. I've been to the Menil too and wsa generally impressed with the quality of the museum (but not the temporary show they were displaying). I have to say though, the MFAH is one of the finest art museums I have ever been to. Some of the traveling shows they have in the main space are absolutely phenomenal.
|
|
|
Post by echnaton on Dec 16, 2007 2:52:47 GMT -4
We are very lucky to have the MFAH, the Contemporary Arts Museum and the various Menil collections. You're right about the traveling shows. The MFAH gets some great shows in to supplement the quite good permanent collection. Have you ever been to the Byzantine Fresco Chapel? It is a remarkable place. Worth a visit for anyone with even spare 15 minutes on Houston. I suppose all art is not for all people. Some produce art in forms that seem to appeal mostly to other artists. Kind of like 12 tone music. It has a certain interest, but primarily appeals to a relatively small base compared to tonal music written before or since Schoenberg.
|
|
|
Post by nomuse on Dec 16, 2007 3:08:53 GMT -4
"...The reception of them is intuitive, but the creation of them is not."
That's a saver. Puts more pithily than I ever could that argument I have every time a director, or producer, or even a board operator says "The audience doesn't have your training; they won't realize it is wrong."
Yes, they will realize it is wrong. They just won't be able to articulate why. And we have the harder job; it is easy to know when a sound, a light, even the height of a doorknob is "wrong" -- but it is deucedly hard to know what is "right" and be able to get it on stage.
(Leading to the even worse conversation, the "I just taped the sound effect we need off my TV. It just needs to be cleaned up a little." Ah, how to possibly explain how well that is going to work and how much the audience is going to notice in the end, despite everything we do to "clean it up.")
(And I am left bemused that my spell checker passed "pithily" and "deucedly." Was it programmed across the pond, perchance?)
|
|
|
Post by JayUtah on Dec 16, 2007 19:33:44 GMT -4
Giger is the kind of guy who's artistic ability I can admire but I would never want to actually own any of his pieces.
His early work is not macabre. But indeed the works for which he is most noted tend to be disturbing.
The question is whether art ought to be disturbing. If you accept that the purpose art is to evoke an emotional response, is it okay to evoke negative emotions? Is repulsion a legitimate response to art?
|
|
Jason
Pluto
May all your hits be crits
Posts: 5,579
|
Post by Jason on Dec 16, 2007 20:10:01 GMT -4
Oh Giger's work is art - it's just disturbing art that I wouldn't want hanging on my wall.
|
|
|
Post by Ginnie on Dec 16, 2007 21:25:28 GMT -4
Interesting work though. I wouldn't put it on my wall either but it doesn't seem to be meant for that anyway.
|
|