abstract sculpture
galen01@concentric.net galen
can get a discussion going:
Abstract/minimalist sculpture is an excuse for no talent jerks to call
themselves artists. It is a sign of the times-- cheap mediam, cheap
message, cheap art. The dark ages of art is here?
Agree or disagree...
Evan Hughes
If anyone presents a piece of work and claims that it is GOOD art, I
apply a simple test: if it is good art, people will form strong opinions
about it (positive or negative); if it is not so good, people will be
indifferent and pass by.
An example of this process was the poll carried out in Birmingham, UK,
where the residents were asked to nominate their most favorite and most
hated sculptures. The strongest opinions were formed about the Iron Man
sculpture where half the people loved it, and half hated it.
Unfortunately, this test indicates that one of the worlds most important
works of art is the yeast based sandwich spread Marmite! (I hate it)
Evan
--
Evan Hughes, PhD
Everything I say is my own mistake.
CountVoo
>>Abstract/minimalist sculpture is an excuse for no >>talent jerks to call
themselves artists
Yes this is very probable "abstract" artist are unartful and w/o talent...
however some abstract art may indeed have a very diffinitive art value whereas
the observor fails to see the intrinscate message, and often this could be
overcome simply by the artist explaining the method to his/her madness.
CROCUSDES
<galen writes:)
<(snip)Abstract/minimalist sculpture is an excuse for no talent jerks to call
<themselves artists. It is a sign of the times-- cheap mediam, cheap
<message, cheap art. The dark ages of art is here?
I have to wonder about the confrontational tone of this request for a
discussion. Such an offhanded stereotypical representation of artists doesn't
really warrent a serious discussion on the subject. This lack of understanding
is usually offered by opinionated amatuers rather than working professionals.
So unless the writer can offer a more cogent explaination of his/her
description or opinion, I'm not sure the request is worth more than a summary
dismissal.
It's often helpful as well, to state what one thinks of as an acceptable form
as well as the unacceptable. Examples of both wouldn't hurt to illustrate the
reason for such strong statements.
Chris Ray - sculptor
http://members.aol.com/crocusdes
Andrew Werby
<e.j.h...@rmcs.cranfield.ac.uk> wrote:
> galen wrote:
> >
> > This newsgroup is getting dull. So, let me throw this at you and maybe we
> > can get a discussion going:
> >
> > Abstract/minimalist sculpture is an excuse for no talent jerks to call
> > themselves artists. It is a sign of the times-- cheap mediam, cheap
> > message, cheap art. The dark ages of art is here?
> >
> > Agree or disagree...
>
> If anyone presents a piece of work and claims that it is GOOD art, I
> apply a simple test: if it is good art, people will form strong opinions
> about it (positive or negative); if it is not so good, people will be
> indifferent and pass by.
[According to this test, then, Galen has validated abstract and minimalist
sculpture. Although I don't care much for Minimalism personally, it is not
necessarily cheap, either to buy or to make. It is an esthetic tailored to
the means of production of large-scale fabricated work, where an artist
sends a drawing and some specifications to a fabricator and it is built by
industrial processes. The process works fairly well; it is easy to mock-up
and sell in advance, which is necessary for most large commissions, and it
will turn out looking much as advertised. When people start paying extra
and waiting longer for organic complexity in public sculpture, there might
be more of it.
Abstract sculpture is another case entirely. There is a very wide range of
this type of work, some of it quite beautiful, and certainly as labor-
intensive as any sculpture can be. It spans a range of media, some more
expensive than others. The "message" is what the individual viewer gets
out of it- obviously it will not be meaningful to certain people who want
every piece of art to tell a story, but an the other hand there are others
to whom it will convey quite a bit more than any verbal formula could hope
to. The brand of aggressive ignorance displayed above is fairly common in
these newsgroups- if Galen is feeling lonely in his opinions he is referred
to rec.arts.fine, where there is a fellow named Mani Deli who is constantly
voicing similar sentiments- perhaps they could form a claque.]
> An example of this process was the poll carried out in Birmingham, UK,
> where the residents were asked to nominate their most favorite and most
> hated sculptures. The strongest opinions were formed about the Iron Man
> sculpture where half the people loved it, and half hated it.
[Is there a picture of this piece on the Web?]
>
> Unfortunately, this test indicates that one of the worlds most important
> works of art is the yeast based sandwich spread Marmite! (I hate it)
>
>
> Evan
> --
> Evan Hughes, PhD
>
> Everything I say is my own mistake.
>
[But it's the food of the future, Evan- get used to it!]
Andrew Werby
>
UNITED ARTWORKS- Sculpture, Jewelry, and other art stuff
http://unitedartworks.com
New- Artworks Computer Tools for 3d Design and Realization
NiteMayor
>Abstract/minimalist sculpture is an excuse for no talent jerks to call
><themselves artists
>Such an offhanded stereotypical representation of artists doesn't
>really warrent a serious discussion on the subject.
"Serious discussion...?" If you try to be too serious on the 'Net... someone
will "flame you." But I like to look at the positive side of this exchange.
I have checking my newsgroups for the last several days... (I enjoy the
alt.sculpture) but it has been empty for more often than not. Maybe there
won't be a serious discussion, but I am interested in what the opinion of
others might be. And at least the newsgroup will be active.
I recently participated in a direct stone carving class. My classmates who all
had various forms of abstract sculpture in front of them... (actually works in
progress) and they did nothing for me... they were just "shaped stones."
Recently I saw some works by Brancusi. I was moved. What is the difference?
I have often thought that abstract art, particularly painting, was a conspiracy
of artists that couldn't render a portrait that looked like the model, but now
that I have worked with marble, I see the work of some modern artists in
different light. There are pieces that I like. Some are just interesting.
I wish my area had more sculpture available for the public to view.
Where is a good place to view sculpture in the Northeast USA? I can figure out
MOMA and the Phila. MofA... I am looking for lesser known places.
And what makes certain pieces of abstract sculpture interesting??
CROCUSDES
<(nitemayor writes:)
>"Serious discussion...?" If you try to be too serious on the 'Net... someone
>will "flame you."
If you don't try then it's not going to happen. Newsgroups have more potential
for a genuine exchange and diversity of ideas than any other medium I can think
of.
Flamers? Best remedy is to simply ignore them and get on with it. Of course
it's not always easy to deal with their interference but we do the best we can.
>And what makes certain pieces of abstract <sculpture interesting??
Basically the same thing that makes figurative work interesting. It's not
about subject matter so much as content. Strip away the illustrative
components of any work and look at what's left. You'll find your answer there.
The power of Michael Angelo's work lies within the form itself and how
expressive it is, not the subject matter.
Look at a Henry Moore and you may experience a similar intensity of feeling,
especially works from the mid fifties through the sixties. Well, that's a
subjective opinion and you can substitute your own favorites instead for
comparison.
Graculus
>This newsgroup is getting dull. So, let me throw this at you and maybe we
>can get a discussion going:
>
>message, cheap art. The dark ages of art is here?
>
>Agree or disagree...
>
>
No, that was the sign of times past,
the sign of these times is -- who cares?
e_j_h...@my-dejanews.com
dre...@lanminds.com (Andrew Werby) wrote:
> In article <360F4427...@rmcs.cranfield.ac.uk>, Evan Hughes wrote:
> <snip>
> > An example of this process was the poll carried out in Birmingham, UK,
> > where the residents were asked to nominate their most favorite and most
> > hated sculptures. The strongest opinions were formed about the Iron Man
> > sculpture where half the people loved it, and half hated it.
>
> [Is there a picture of this piece on the Web?]
> >
I have done a quick search:
http://rudi.herts.ac.uk/ej/udq/54/cover.html
shows a picture of the "Iron Man" sculpture (by Anthony Gormley) on the cover
of the magazine "Urban Design".
Although I don't live far from Birmingham, I have never seen the piece
myself. I will probably like it, but you never can tell until you see and
touch the real thing.
Evan
--
Evan Hughes, PhD
Everything I say is my own mistake.
-----== Posted via Deja News, The Leader in Internet Discussion ==-----
http://www.dejanews.com/rg_mkgrp.xp Create Your Own Free Member Forum
wildw...@pop.dnvr.uswest.net
provide a baseline of reality from which to deviate. I know of a
model-manufacturing tool which will create a 3-dimensional object if it is
given drawings. So in a sense we can now "photocopy" 3d objects.
Isn't it the point of art that a *person* made something, however technically
deficient? By making a representational figure's features exagerrated, for
example, aren't we taking the first step toward abstraction?
One way of viewing abstract and minimalist work is that it expresses an idea
without the overhead of making that idea an extension of some kind of reality
- it can stand as a more pure expression. In fact. I could argue that the
only reason to extend a representational work instead of doing an abstract is
that a comfortable framework is created by which the intended audience can be
made more receptive to the image.
galen wrote:
> This newsgroup is getting dull. So, let me throw this at you and maybe we
> can get a discussion going:
>
> Abstract/minimalist sculpture is an excuse for no talent jerks to call
> themselves artists. It is a sign of the times-- cheap mediam, cheap
> message, cheap art. The dark ages of art is here?
>
> Agree or disagree...
Andrew Werby
wrote:
> Representational art made sense before photography; now its value is to
> provide a baseline of reality from which to deviate. I know of a
> model-manufacturing tool which will create a 3-dimensional object if it is
> given drawings. So in a sense we can now "photocopy" 3d objects.
[Which tool is this? Are you talking about a heightfield program, like
Cybermesh? Or is this one of those interpolation programs like
Photomodeler? Or is this an actual 3-d scanner/printer combination?]
>
> Isn't it the point of art that a *person* made something, however technically
> deficient? By making a representational figure's features exagerrated, for
> example, aren't we taking the first step toward abstraction?
>
> One way of viewing abstract and minimalist work is that it expresses an idea
> without the overhead of making that idea an extension of some kind of reality
> - it can stand as a more pure expression. In fact. I could argue that the
> only reason to extend a representational work instead of doing an abstract is
> that a comfortable framework is created by which the intended audience can be
> made more receptive to the image.
[There is a lot more to reality than a "comfortable framework", don't you
think? Can't art be more than the illustration of an idea? What is "pure
expression" if there is no form or content to it? No answers today- just
questions...]
Andrew Werby
>
> galen wrote:
>
> > This newsgroup is getting dull. So, let me throw this at you and maybe we
> > can get a discussion going:
> >
> > Abstract/minimalist sculpture is an excuse for no talent jerks to call
> > themselves artists. It is a sign of the times-- cheap mediam, cheap
> > message, cheap art. The dark ages of art is here?
> >
> > Agree or disagree...
>
>
>
>
> galen wrote:
>
> > This newsgroup is getting dull. So, let me throw this at you and maybe we
> > can get a discussion going:
> >
> > Abstract/minimalist sculpture is an excuse for no talent jerks to call
> > themselves artists. It is a sign of the times-- cheap mediam, cheap
> > message, cheap art. The dark ages of art is here?
> >
> > Agree or disagree...
UNITED ARTWORKS- Sculpture, Jewelry, and other art stuff