How about Jennifer Eiserman (Terry?)
Dan Fox
Whoever is posting as Jennifer Eiserman (someone named Terry?) seems to be
thoughtful and reasonable. I haven't read much my her, though. What does
the group think of her as a candidate for this group? I think we've got to
keep adding to the list to avoid stagnation..
--
Dan
'The road to excess leads to the palace of wisdom.' - Blake
Quo Vadis
<dan...@erols.com> writes
>I've skimmed some of the Bateman posts (and added my two cents, natch).
>Whoever is posting as Jennifer Eiserman (someone named Terry?) seems to be
>thoughtful and reasonable. I haven't read much my her, though. What does
>the group think of her as a candidate for this group? I think we've got to
>keep adding to the list to avoid stagnation..
>
server to subscribe to alt.brallen that it is most likely they will co-
operate ... it may be that we can just stay here (although I am still
going to set up the new newsgroup just in case). Maybe worth posting the
others and asking them if they want to give it a go.
Glenn Geist
debate without reverting to obnoxious insults?
dan...@erols.com(Dan Fox) wrote:
>I've skimmed some of the Bateman posts (and added my two cents, natch).
>Whoever is posting as Jennifer Eiserman (someone named Terry?) seems to be
>thoughtful and reasonable. I haven't read much my her, though. What does
>the group think of her as a candidate for this group? I think we've got to
>keep adding to the list to avoid stagnation..
>
Dan Fox
> I'm avoiding that discussion, but why exclude anyone if they can
> debate without reverting to obnoxious insults?
>
I just want to check with the group for people I don't know very well.
Hutto has posted some very reasonable verbiage at times. Am I being too
cautious??
Dan
Just wanna have fun....
Kay again
Dan Fox wrote in message <19990602160241.572$g...@newsreader.com>...
:grg...@earthlink.net wrote:
:> I'm avoiding that discussion, but why exclude anyone if they can
:> debate without reverting to obnoxious insults?
:>
:Exactly. Why couldn't I have said that?
Jennifer Eiserman (Terry) - yes.
:
:I just want to check with the group for people I don't know very well.
:Hutto has posted some very reasonable verbiage at times. Am I being too
:cautious??
:Dan
:Just wanna have fun....
I'm glad you said that, Dan. I was looking at raf (I still have around 400
posts to skim through) and though I've only picked up after May 26th or so,
I've noticed a couple of posts from Brother Alphabet (Hutto) which I agreed
with which made me wonder about myself. But he chose to cross boundaries and
before we invite Hutto, wasn't he the reason we are here? Also, what is
going on with Glenn? Is the fake Glenn posting I'm not Glenn too? The
whole thing is very, very bizarre! May (now Julian) is still ragging
Alison, others seem to be missing from the group there or have signed off in
disgust. Don't miss it at all, but a few more posters here would liven
things up (not that they are dead) but after a while we get used to one
another's viewpoints and a *civilized and *dignified discussion, complete
with disagreements wouldn't be unwelcome as long as we don't become insane
like _____ (insert your favorite psycho's name here)
Kay
Erik A. Mattila
broadcast the secret to raf? I'm not saying Terry would do this, mind
you, it's just a thought that came to be in my ganglia.
I'm really sorry that Glenn is avoiding the discussion -- it't not really
that much about Bateman as it is about the issue of large edition prints.
I think artists get a little too precious about the sacred cows of art,
but frankly, when I was involved in hand made print making I got feeling
that it was such a tremendous amount of work was it worth it. I couldn't
help thinking about economic issues, i.e. time/effort vs. rewards, so the
'quality' issue was somewhat repressed. I just think Glenn would have
some very valuable insights on this issue.
Years ago I did very intricate rapidograph drawings, which took me up to
200 hours of intense work. What could I do with them. There was no way I
could sell them and come uip with anything resembling a wage. So I
elected to have them printed on an offset. I published two in this
manner. I would just go around to Head Shops and wholesale a handful for
a dollar each when I was tapped out, and come home with thirty bucks or
so.
A company in Los Angeles, the Platt Poster Company, obtained one of my
'prints' and reproduced it as a black light poster. They basically just
put dayglow colors behind the pen and ink drawing. They published it,
along with my signature, as "Lost Horizons" and it became an international
best seller for about two years. Friends told me they saw it in Paris,
London, Tokyo, Mexico City -- it was everywhere. I tried to sue, but
after spending two hundred precious dollars on a lawyer I got to the point
where I had to provide 5 grand upfront for a very 'iffy' civil suit (since
then copyrite laws have been improved greatly for artists). So that was
the end of it, I just had to eat it. A few years back I was watching a
very bad Tommy Chong movie and there was my work hanging on his bedroom
wall. Boo hoo.
Am I saying this is an emotional issue? Probably. I'm still bitter -- a
famous unknown artist!
Erik
Dan Fox wrote:
> grg...@earthlink.net wrote:
> > I'm avoiding that discussion, but why exclude anyone if they can
> > debate without reverting to obnoxious insults?
> >
> Exactly. Why couldn't I have said that?
>
Glenn Geist
Nah - it's the real Glenn - me - posting that the fake Glenn is fake
I thought it was funny for a little while, but it worries me that
someone can post under my name like that - when I tried to e-mail him
to find out how he did it, the mail came to my mail box.
How do I know he won't post something really dangerous using my name?
Scary stuff!
"Kay again" <scarl...@theriver.com> wrote:
>
>Dan Fox wrote in message <19990602160241.572$g...@newsreader.com>...
>:grg...@earthlink.net wrote:
>:> I'm avoiding that discussion, but why exclude anyone if they can
>:> debate without reverting to obnoxious insults?
>:>
>:Exactly. Why couldn't I have said that?
>
>Jennifer Eiserman (Terry) - yes.
>:
>:I just want to check with the group for people I don't know very well.
>:Hutto has posted some very reasonable verbiage at times. Am I being too
>:cautious??
>
>
>:Dan
>:Just wanna have fun....
>
Glenn Geist
You don't have to go far back to know that his behavior is erratic - I
looked through deja news fopr burning chrome and he'e been steadily
insane for a long time. I think the real offenders aren't hard to
spot. Everyone gets testy at times and I think most of us can handle
that, but without the likes of chrome dome, hutto and even mani, we
would have a real edge over the other group
Glenn
Kay again
Kay
Glenn Geist wrote in message <3755cefa...@news.earthlink.net>...
:The way things are today, if you aren't sitting on teh curb with a
:bottle of muscatel, you're an elitist - of course accusing people of
:being elitist is an elitist statement, so we're all of us elitist in
:one way or another. Sooner or later, if you can't throw people out,
:the hooligans will take over.
:
:I thought the print thread was going in so many directions I was best
:off out of it. I'm a little pressed for time this week anyway.
:
:By basic opinion is that if there's amarket for inexpensive decorative
:stuff, it will be provided for - the best we can hope for is truth in
:advertising. The public isn't really very well informed about the
:differences between something turned out with great skill and effort
:by a printmaker, on his own or collaborating with a printer, and those
:Millpond Press wildlife prints. As many people that have heard about
:the Dali scams, most people still don't know and when an "Original
:Picasso Giclee print" is offered for sale, too many people don't know
:it's just a picture of a painting authorized by some lawyers who
:control the estate. It's not art, but a photograph of art. Great to
:put in a dorm room or motel and fine for picasso lovers who can't
:afford Picasso, but "original?"
:
:I don't want to dump on poster collectors though - or collectors in
:general lest somebody jump on me for all the weird things I collect.
:Old advertising is hot stuff and if a poster isn't art, it *is an
:artifact and some great artists designed the images in many cases.
:VAlue perceived is as real as any kind of value.
:
:So I don't know what else to say, except that I really love
:printmaking as an art form and I collect prints. If Bateman makes a
:bundle I don't care - the people who buy that sort of thing aren't
:being wooed away from buying mezzotints or etchings or wood engravings
:or is real connoiseurship ever going to be wiidespread.
:
:Of course it bugs me when people argue that Mass produced wildlife
:prints are real art for real people and anybody else is an artsy
:elitist - but who can argue with those people anyway.
:
:I'm raving - gotta run
:
:Glenn
:
:"Erik A. Mattila" <emat...@tomatoweb.com> wrote:
:
:>Well, when will someone invited decide that we are a bunch of elitists and
:>
:>> grg...@earthlink.net wrote:
:>> > I'm avoiding that discussion, but why exclude anyone if they can
:>> > debate without reverting to obnoxious insults?
:>> >
:>> Exactly. Why couldn't I have said that?
:>>
:>> I just want to check with the group for people I don't know very well.
:>
:
:
Kay again
After having converted the hapless country of Mexico to the *true art of
gigglzz, she is back, she's horny for ya, but strangely - her spelling and
grammar are good and she's making sense!
Hutto made sense!
Can't people stay the same so I can at least have an opinion that doesn't
have to be changed with the cycles of the moon?
She still wants you, Dan!
Kay
(protecting your virtue)
Dan Fox
> Well, when will someone invited decide that we are a bunch of elitists
> and broadcast the secret to raf? I'm not saying Terry would do this,
> mind you, it's just a thought that came to be in my ganglia.
Somebody might, but if we scope them out and discuss the matter with them
before inviting them, I think the chances are small. Tinman says yes,
by the way, so I'll give him the group name.
Our biggest problem right now is people who can't get the group. Alison
is working on this, and apparently most isps will add the group if they
are asked to do so.
> I'm really sorry that Glenn is avoiding the discussion -- it't not really
> that much about Bateman as it is about the issue of large edition prints.
> I think artists get a little too precious about the sacred cows of art,
> but frankly, when I was involved in hand made print making I got feeling
> that it was such a tremendous amount of work was it worth it. I couldn't
> help thinking about economic issues, i.e. time/effort vs. rewards, so the
> 'quality' issue was somewhat repressed. I just think Glenn would have
> some very valuable insights on this issue.
Yes, I'd welcome Glenn's views on most any subject.
>
> Years ago I did very intricate rapidograph drawings, which took me up to
> 200 hours of intense work. What could I do with them. There was no way
> I could sell them and come uip with anything resembling a wage. So I
> elected to have them printed on an offset. I published two in this
> manner. I would just go around to Head Shops and wholesale a handful for
> a dollar each when I was tapped out, and come home with thirty bucks or
> so.
>
> A company in Los Angeles, the Platt Poster Company, obtained one of my
> 'prints' and reproduced it as a black light poster. They basically just
> put dayglow colors behind the pen and ink drawing. They published it,
> along with my signature, as "Lost Horizons" and it became an
> international best seller for about two years. Friends told me they saw
> it in Paris, London, Tokyo, Mexico City -- it was everywhere. I tried to
> sue, but after spending two hundred precious dollars on a lawyer I got to
> the point where I had to provide 5 grand upfront for a very 'iffy' civil
> suit (since then copyrite laws have been improved greatly for artists).
> So that was the end of it, I just had to eat it. A few years back I was
> watching a very bad Tommy Chong movie and there was my work hanging on
> his bedroom wall. Boo hoo.
Oh, I know that poster! Yeah, when you do anything like that you'd better
bend over,pal, 'cause you're gonna get screweeeeeeed........... I have a
couple of other, very disparate examples - When I was in college I made my
way by playing in any kind of band that needed a guitar - jazz to country
to rock, even 'cocktail guitar' in bars. I wrote a few tunes, too, for
local bands. Not good, but serviceable commercial stuff. I sold a few to
bands and promoters that came through - including one (for $300.) that
became a monster hit and rock classic. Of course they used another name on
the record and music, etc., and nothing was in writing. Even when I hear it
today on Oldies stations I start to twitch if I let myself.
(On the plus side, I co-wrote a novel under a pseudonym that my partner
and I contracted to a cheesy press for a flat $500. fee. It got bought
by a big publisher and they were completely honest. I made big bucks.
A funny aside - My pseudonym became well-known enough that people claimed
to have gotten drunk with him in Paris, etc. Pretty good trick, since he
didn't exist. I finally killed him off a few years ago by letting the
word out that he had OD'd on heroin.)
It doesn't matter if you do have a contract. A friend of mine
(and a great abstract painter) paid the bills for many years
as an actor in movies and tv. He played a Romulan (alien type) in a Star
Trek episode. For some reason, his picture got onto coffee cups, posters,
all the Star Trek junk. He has never seen a cent from the pic, even though
his contract with Paramount specifically requires it. Not even the Screen
Actors Guild could get him any money - Paramount simply ignores it or
delays and obfuscates. (Producers have also 'forgotten' to pay him for
reruns of tv commercials and episodes until he protested.)
Dan
Also been wronged..
Glenn Geist
Glenn
"Erik A. Mattila" <emat...@tomatoweb.com> wrote:
>Well, when will someone invited decide that we are a bunch of elitists and
>broadcast the secret to raf? I'm not saying Terry would do this, mind
>you, it's just a thought that came to be in my ganglia.
>
>I'm really sorry that Glenn is avoiding the discussion -- it't not really
>that much about Bateman as it is about the issue of large edition prints.
>I think artists get a little too precious about the sacred cows of art,
>but frankly, when I was involved in hand made print making I got feeling
>that it was such a tremendous amount of work was it worth it. I couldn't
>help thinking about economic issues, i.e. time/effort vs. rewards, so the
>'quality' issue was somewhat repressed. I just think Glenn would have
>some very valuable insights on this issue.
>
>Years ago I did very intricate rapidograph drawings, which took me up to
>200 hours of intense work. What could I do with them. There was no way I
>could sell them and come uip with anything resembling a wage. So I
>elected to have them printed on an offset. I published two in this
>manner. I would just go around to Head Shops and wholesale a handful for
>a dollar each when I was tapped out, and come home with thirty bucks or
>so.
>
>A company in Los Angeles, the Platt Poster Company, obtained one of my
>'prints' and reproduced it as a black light poster. They basically just
>put dayglow colors behind the pen and ink drawing. They published it,
>along with my signature, as "Lost Horizons" and it became an international
>best seller for about two years. Friends told me they saw it in Paris,
>London, Tokyo, Mexico City -- it was everywhere. I tried to sue, but
>after spending two hundred precious dollars on a lawyer I got to the point
>where I had to provide 5 grand upfront for a very 'iffy' civil suit (since
>then copyrite laws have been improved greatly for artists). So that was
>the end of it, I just had to eat it. A few years back I was watching a
>very bad Tommy Chong movie and there was my work hanging on his bedroom
>wall. Boo hoo.
>
>Am I saying this is an emotional issue? Probably. I'm still bitter -- a
>famous unknown artist!
>
>Erik
>
Dan Fox
> After having converted the hapless country of Mexico to the *true art of
> gigglzz, she is back, she's horny for ya, but strangely - her spelling
> and grammar are good and she's making sense!
Probably had a good man in Mexico to bring her around (equating illiteracy
with lesbianism - I MUST be tired!)
>
> Hutto made sense!
So did Ted Bundy.
> Can't people stay the same so I can at least have an opinion that doesn't
> have to be changed with the cycles of the moon?
People don't change. Our perceptions of them do. What did Ijust saa?
>
> She still wants you, Dan!
Women are attracted to me, because they sense my power.
>
> Kay
> (protecting your virtue)
*sniff* Thank you.
--
Dan
'The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom.' - Blake
Erik A. Mattila
Kay again wrote:
> After having converted the hapless country of Mexico to the *true art of
> gigglzz, she is back, she's horny for ya, but strangely - her spelling and
> grammar are good and she's making sense!
Well, sure. A spanish/english dictionary works both ways. And she probably
got some of the "manyana philosophy" and types slower.
Erik
>
>
> Hutto made sense!
>
> Can't people stay the same so I can at least have an opinion that doesn't
> have to be changed with the cycles of the moon?
>
> She still wants you, Dan!
>
> Kay
> (protecting your virtue)
Quo Vadis
<dan...@erols.com> writes
>Probably had a good man in Mexico to bring her around (equating illiteracy
>with lesbianism - I MUST be tired!)
Maybe she ran out of money for drugs ?
L.Tunkkanen
WHAT IS REALLY THE DIFFERENCE
between this thread and the worst of RAF,
Except that the poor lady cannot defend.
Do we need any kind of flaming here?
Just asking
- lauri
--
//www.netti.fi/~laurleva/
The fact that I abuse my office address does not
imply that my employer agrees with or is aware of
my opinions expressed here
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
Kay again
point because we aren't doing it to one another and when people here make a
statement it isn't followed by a barrage of posts toward a particular person
in THIS ng. Also, M. has been e-mailing Dan at home, etc. In this case, we
are not flaming another person with an opinion in the same n.g. - we are
flaming someone who is not here but who has proposed an art project ("Flower
Power" to assist the Columbine school massacre victims and prevent violence
in the schools) which most consider beyond shameless self-promoting toward
tasteless exploitation. I have a friend who teaches art to the schools in
Littleton and take personal offense to this exploitation - Dan's wife may
take personal offense to the private e-mails. I don't believe anyone here
*hates M., more like she is good fodder for gossip.
Guilty as sin,
Kay
L.Tunkkanen wrote in message <7j5up1$eu2$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
:In article <$YVhDgAL...@raimes.demon.co.uk>,
Quo Vadis
<lauri_le...@my-deja.com> writes
>
>WHAT IS REALLY THE DIFFERENCE
>between this thread and the worst of RAF,
>Except that the poor lady cannot defend.
>
>Do we need any kind of flaming here?
>Just asking
>
>- lauri
Don't concern yourself, there is nothing being said here that hasn't
already been said to her on raf - and anyway Hutto has his own private
list, of which she is a member and you can guarantee their discussions
about *us* will make this look like a tea party.
Cheers !
Alison
L.Tunkkanen
Quo Vadis <ubi...@somewhere.in.cosmos> wrote:
> In article <7j5up1$eu2$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, L. Tunkkanen
> <lauri_le...@my-deja.com> writes
>
> >
> >WHAT IS REALLY THE DIFFERENCE
> already been said to her on raf - and anyway Hutto has his own private
> list, of which she is a member and you can guarantee their discussions
> about *us* will make this look like a tea party.
> Cheers !
> Alison
>
Kay again
L.Tunkkanen wrote in message <7j85bn$89i$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
:In article <ZC8IVOAu...@raimes.demon.co.uk>,
O.K. Lauri, you are right. No more gossip! Now do you have anything to
contribute here (there are quite a few discussions about art in case you
haven't seen them)? We would welcome your participation in them, or are you
only intending to criticize the posts that don't measure up to your
standards of n.g. behavior?
Kay
L.Tunkkanen
"Kay again" <scarl...@theriver.com> wrote:
> O.K. Lauri, you are right. No more gossip! Now do you have anything
to
> contribute here (there are quite a few discussions about art in case
you
> haven't seen them)? We would welcome your participation in them, or
are you
> only intending to criticize the posts that don't measure up to your
> standards of n.g. behavior?
> Kay
Thanks Kay,
I am working on it. I am not good at giving art critics, if it is the
new focus of this group. Especially paintings are difficult to me. No
objection if someone wants to comment my pieces.
The essay I'm working on is about visual thinking. Something we left
fallow in the previous life. Hope I get it ready on Sunday.
--
//www.netti.fi/~laurleva/
The fact that I abuse my office address does not
imply that my employer agrees with or is aware of
my opinions expressed here
Glenn Geist
>Who is Bateman?
>Kay
>
Robert Bateman - He does wildlife paintings for the most part, but is
mostly known for the photo reproductions of those paintings. I think
he's published by Millpond press, who does quality repros, but they
are not - IMO art. There is a thread in the *other group about
prints, art and the evils of the world and I'm not getting into it.
There's too much confusion about the word print for one thing. I
don't like to call reproductions prints and the water there is too
muddy.
Glenn
Kay again
L.Tunkkanen wrote in message <7j8grs$bf5$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>...
:In article <pCN53.13075$4b.2...@news2.giganews.com>,
: "Kay again" <scarl...@theriver.com> wrote:
:
:> O.K. Lauri, you are right. No more gossip! Now do you have anything
:to
:> contribute here (there are quite a few discussions about art in case
:you
:> haven't seen them)? We would welcome your participation in them, or
:are you
:> only intending to criticize the posts that don't measure up to your
:> standards of n.g. behavior?
:> Kay
:
:Thanks Kay,
:I am working on it. I am not good at giving art critics,
I'm not good at *not* gossiping...
: if it is the
:new focus of this group.
You don't have to give a crique if you don't feel comfortable. I think we
have been doing this out of curiousity and to get feedback from people who
may criticize, but who will NOT flame us or the work. I guess we are all
looking for *constructive criticism, but (I think) we welcome positive
feedback as well. Mostly we talk about art.
: Especially paintings are difficult to me. No
:objection if someone wants to comment my pieces.
I glanced quickly at your site, Lauri. I have a problem seeing the top 2
images because they didn't download at all as a thumbnail. I would like to
know what your primary artform is - sculpture, site-specific sculpture,
assemblage? I'm not sure because it took very long to download and I
promised Dan a critique first, but your site is refreshing simply because we
have so many painters here that it may be somewhat challenging to apply our
knowledge to sculpture or 3-D!
:The essay I'm working on is about visual thinking. Something we left
:fallow in the previous life. Hope I get it ready on Sunday.
Looking forward to reading it (and I like your work from the little I was
able to see of it)
Kay
Quo Vadis
<lauri_le...@my-deja.com> writes
>The essay I'm working on is about visual thinking. Something we left
>fallow in the previous life. Hope I get it ready on Sunday.
That sounds interesting. I have been watching a series on TV about the
relationship between art and science and the genetic changes in the way
we now view art. One of the exercises was to run seventy Mondrian images
juxtaposed with imitations of his work past a couple of hundred students
and have them guess which ones were Mondrian's. Ninety percent chose the
real thing.
Kay again
Dan Fox wrote in message <19990605205453.016$v...@newsreader.com>...
:Quo Vadis <ubi...@somewhere.in.cosmos> wrote:
:> In article <7j8grs$bf5$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, L. Tunkkanen
:Yes, I've conducted informal experiments like this from time to time
:when I was teaching. The argument advanced by Mani and others that anyone
:can make a work undistinguishable from a Rothko or a Pollack is utter
:nonsense. The imitations always look like imitations and even kids can tell
:the difference. Someone said that the difference between a genuine Pollack
:or Rothko or Kline, etc., and an imitation, is the difference between a
:living person and a corpse. (I think I've mentioned this before, but it
:bears repeating.)
:
:--
:Dan
:
:'The road of excess leads to the palace of wisdom.' - Blake
I also may have stated this, but I have read that there are forgeries of
almost all the great masters and some get past the *experts and become part
of museums permanent collections (read in one of the mags about the last
Medici heir - female, work sold was a forgery), but that a Mondrian is
almost "impossible" to forge!
Kay
Dan Fox
> In article <pCN53.13075$4b.2...@news2.giganews.com>,
> "Kay again" <scarl...@theriver.com> wrote:
>
> > O.K. Lauri, you are right. No more gossip!
Hi, Lauri -
I didn't think we were being mean with our gossip - I think we were
letting off a little steam about people who have hurt our feelings in the
other group. But perhaps we should limit our more fanciful essays to
private email.
I for one would welcome your comments on the art discussed here, pro or
con. Please don't think you have to offer a *professional* opinion.
I look forward to seeing your essay. It's good to have you with us.
Regards,
Dan
>
> Thanks Kay,
> I am working on it. I am not good at giving art critics, if it is the
> new focus of this group. Especially paintings are difficult to me. No
> objection if someone wants to comment my pieces.
>
Dan Fox
> In article <7j8grs$bf5$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, L. Tunkkanen
> <lauri_le...@my-deja.com> writes
>
> >fallow in the previous life. Hope I get it ready on Sunday.
>