Mondrian vs. intellegence
Mani Deli
>
>> lib...@uvsc.edu (Ross Green) wrote:
>
>>> Yes, Mondrian did paint: he painted all his life, and he
>>> did it with genius.
>
>> Of course he painted. He just couldn't draw very well.
>
>He drew very well. (Study his figurative works.)
>
>> I'll say it facing you dead on, "Mondrian is a primal
>> idiot of Modern Academic Art."
>
>Yes, Mani, every abstract artist is an idiot---and you are sane.
>
Speak for yourself Ross.
You don't seem to know much about fine abstract art; Egyptian Persian,
illuminated manuscripts, decorative past and present, Mathematical and
computer art, Escher, Tanguey, Lam, early Duchamp to name a few.. As I said
many times abstraction is older than realism. Much is very fine and
interesting. You imagine that the only abstract artists are Modern Academics
and that any criticism of this lot can never be constructive.
>> Even better than Franz Klein.
>
I gave Mondrian a compliment. His color is better than Kleins, KLIne's,
KliNe's his Line's.
^^^^^
>You don't even get the names right: Franz Kline--Yves Klein--
>--two different artists, with similar last names. I think this is
>the 3rd time I've mentioned this--next time you will be fined ($)
That is the limit of sensible criticism. Do you want me to write it three
hundred times. Perhaps I could do in Twombly style chicken scratches and sell
it to you.
>
>> Mondrian's limit was skill and he cultivated limits on
>> intelligence.
>
>Mondrian was a trained, highly-skilled artist. (He was also an
>intellectual.)
>
Certainly toilet trained. I've browsed five pound Mondrian books and see no
evidence of skill.
Why not quote one of his more intelligent statements for us in your Quote de
jour
I mentioned Mondrian's color which excited you so much. I think he might have
got his inspiration from jelly beans; no Basset Mix.
You didn’t have anything to say about my point on Mondrian’s relation to
Malevich and the Russian Supremitists. Was that just a stupid remark in your
estimation?
>> Lets hope the Archbishop ignores this one lest his
>> wrath be upon us all.
>
The best thing about our Archbishop is his sense of humor.
>Ignoring you should be the official policy in r.a.f.--you never
>say anything new or constructive--trying to debate with you
>is a total waste of time.
>
Perhaps it is the official policy of Artspeakenstein but you have as much
official power in this conference as Santa Claus.
Are you fond of wasting time or did your mother write the above?
Mani DeLi
..no skill no art.
er...@phidias.colorado.edu
> Mani DeLi
> ..no skill no art.
You spend too much time (which you apparently have based on the number
and length of your posts) attacking everybody (the living, the dead). I
don't pretend to be in a position to criticize anybody's work except my
own. I really know little about Mondrian; there very well may be
artists who would deserve his recognition more than he, but at least he
used what skill he may or may not have had and worked to leave a legacy
which is surely more enduring and positive than what many leave behind.
> Perhaps it is the official policy of Artspeakenstein but you have as much
> official power in this conference as Santa Claus.
And I as much as the Easter Bunny. Come on, these are public newsgroups
and just because someone isn't responsible for a third of the traffic
(as it would appear you are), and they hold an opinion contrary to your
own, doesn't mean that you should take every opportunity to insult them.
I respect your opinions and you have obviously done your homework, but
lighten up a bit and folks will surely take your posts more seriously.
btw, sorry for jumping in on your thread
-Erik Johnson
er...@phidias.colorado.edu
http://phidias.colorado.edu/vgallery.htm
jeff green
Look at it as performance art or something . . .
Art is the experience of the observer.
If this means blowing a gasket over a Mondrian painting,
or seeing a pile of cow dung in a field as an inspired sculpture,
then so be it.
It is not art to the observer because someone calls it art (no
matter WHAT it is, or by WHO), and it will not CEASE to BE art
because someone says it's not.
A lot of critics seem to be people who can't quite get their
OWN art out. Artistically constipated or something.
Thank You.
jeffrey green
(soapbox mode off)
PS-Wow. Three feces references in one post.
Mani Deli
>Art is the experience of the observer.
>
>If this means blowing a gasket over a Mondrian painting,
>or seeing a pile of cow dung in a field as an inspired sculpture,
>then so be it.
>
are reasons.
>It is not art to the observer because someone calls it art (no
>matter WHAT it is, or by WHO), and it will not CEASE to BE art
>because someone says it's not.
Well then for you everything is art. Pick your nose in public.
>
>A lot of critics seem to be people who can't quite get their
>OWN art out. Artistically constipated or something.
Even more artists fit this description.>
>Thank You.
>
MD