wheres art going, whats next?more gimmickism
andrew mc sweeney
art,how much of art nowadays is just hysterical talented self congradulatory
pastche,faux pas correct,has anybody thought about moba(self taught)art,i
remember in college a whole lot of students sitting around,all with totally
different aptitudes,abilities and ways of doing things,the first thing
college does is to try "fix" this and get everybody`s work up to a certain
standard doing away with everybodys moba,after they reach this standard they
are told be mad ,be arty,be your moba(these arent the exact words used)is
this art today,the this is my unique view on things,my myness,i think this
to be just regurgitation of what is held to be a picasso ,think of your man
who sawed a cow in half,thats rubbish ,that aint art,a clever gimmickle
maybe but not art,his defence is that even if this rubbish then this is the
geist of the times and that when its looked back on with the fullness of
time it will be seen in much the same context as the cave paintings in that
its representitive of the times,is this all art today is ,clever gimmicky
picasso rubbish,the ol` angle on art,good or bad this is whats being taught
in art schools and i reckon its the same the world over,,fairs fair
like,walk into any gallery and this what you see,pastiche,how can art evolve
from this,art is expression so instead of converting new art students genius
into talent why isnt this exploited,genius genius and post talented genius
are both quite different,arts finished.it cant progress,this newsgroups good
because ye talk about materials and stuff and its the materials that have
the greatest influence on how a painting turns out,naples yellow is
great,works well with the darker browns,sorry if i upset anyone,this
arguement got me kicked out of college as i refuse to work to the schools
critera,a lot of the students i went to school with were the turn up and
serve your time,keep your head down ,learn the formula,do what your told and
get your piece of paper at the end of it,this is probably what you see when
you get into a gallery(force fed rubbish(very well done though))
p.s.i reckon the whole artist genius thing is one great big hysteric,it can
all be learned,its just it would take a long time to learn it all,
Jewel
>
>hello from new person,reading through i read something
I got dizzy after the first two sentences of your
dissertation. If you're going to participate in
news groups and expect anyone to read what you
write you better take the time to do it in the
accepted format...
Charles Eicher
What, and give up his only gimmick?!?
her...@linknet.com.au
----------
In article <7m29ec$atg$1...@scotty.tinet.ie>, "andrew mc sweeney"
<mack...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> p.s.i reckon the whole artist genius thing is one great big hysteric,it can
> all be learned,its just it would take a long time to learn it all,
Yah, pull the other one. If we just put in the time we can all paint
like Rembrandt *LOL*.
Alison A Raimes
>hello from new person,reading through i read something about genius in
<Snipped to save space>
So your typing skills are pretty unique ! well at least you have
something to say - express an opinion which is more than can be said for
your most prominent critic.
You are right in lots of senses - that art schools tend to *mould* you
because they insist on work that is *of the era* (like Damien Hirst and
his cows). That then becomes the focal point of the teaching of many of
today's art schools.
It sounds as though you have conviction in what your art is about and
have stuck to that - goodness knows how you got kicked out of art school
! where did you study ? I was lucky - I was a mature student and was
left to my own devices, as were most of the mature students, so didn't
feel the same sort of pressure as the young hopefuls. Most of us just
made use of the facilities (how I miss the library and the workshop) and
developed our own work knowing fine well that most of the teaching staff
hadn't produced a piece of work in years. You know what they say about
those who can *do*, those that can't teach. How true that was at our
school. The benefit of being at art school is measured in the time you
have available to work on something that in later years will be hindered
by the need to make money to live off.
Who knows where art is going next and who really cares ? most people are
only interested in their own work and the occasional glimpse into the
other world they know damn well they won't be part of. Don't let those
magazine articles convince you that what you see in the glossies is what
is going on in the masses, ok ?
Good luck with your work.
Alison
ali...@raimes.demon.co.uk
http://www.raimes.demon.co.uk
Alison A Raimes
writes
>
>dissertation. If you're going to participate in
>news groups and expect anyone to read what you
>write you better take the time to do it in the
>accepted format...
>
And then you can learn how to participate like her, Andrew - calling
other women *twat* is her most expressive form of communication - though
she admits she would rather have called them *prick* (she changes her
name every month to throw you off but don't worry, we'll keep you
straight).
Alison
ali...@raimes.demon.co.uk
http://www.raimes.demon.co.uk
andrew mc sweeney
Charles Eicher <cei...@inav.net> wrote in message
news:7m6ep4$21...@edrn.newsguy.com...
> >>
> >>hello from new person,reading through i read something
> >
> >I got dizzy after the first two sentences of your
> >dissertation. If you're going to participate in
> >news groups and expect anyone to read what you
> >write you better take the time to do it in the
> >accepted format...
> >
though',says me
>fashion tv
In article <37869...@oracle.zianet.com>, em...@wontwork.com says...
> What, and give up his only gimmick?!?
>
>i dunno what the story with you is,probably tricky and kissassible anyway
whatever it is(better?dont bang your head),says me
>
>> p.s.i reckon the whole artist genius thing is one great big hysteric,it
can
> all be learned,its just it would take a long time to learn it all,
Yah, pull the other one. If we just put in the time we can all paint
like Rembrandt *LOL*.
well i dunno like,its want and not brain that gets things done,thats the way
of the world,,you telling me you cant learn to paint like mucha,sean keating
or even millas or durer or something,,as far as i can make out rembrant only
used something like a hundred and one glazes to kill rawness and sort
edges,if i started tomorrow with the intention that someday if i wanted hard
enough i could paint like rembrant then someday maybe twenty years time i
will be able to paint like rembrant,if i want hard enough and try and stick
an extra bit of brain into figuring it out,i mightnt be able to paint like
turner or draw like michaelangelo but i will be able to paint like rembrant,
or whoever i put my mind to,its just it might take years,if i cant then its
because i havent wanted hard enough,its all about knowing your materials
anyway because anybody with good eyesight and entusiasim can draw.i dunno
,just enjoy what you do,says me,
if anyone has any ideas on a pirate picture(or mural)could ye please
say,says me
andrew mc sweeney
andrew mc sweeney <mack...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:7m7ft2$h61$1...@scotty.tinet.ie...
----- Original Message -----
From: Alison A Raimes <ali...@address.in.signature>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.fine
Sent: Saturday, July 10, 1999 4:28 AM
Subject: Re: wheres art going, whats next?more gimmickism
> >
> > first thanks for saying one or two things i needed to hear
> i recognised a few things,says me
>
> Who knows where art is going next and who really cares ? most people are
> only interested in their own work and ((skip a bit)) articles convince you
that what you see in the glossies is what
> is going on in the masses, ok ?
>
> Good luck with your work.
>
> > you asked about my school,i went to limerick r.t.c.(ireland)for two
years and had three years eduacation prior to that,served five years to my
time,,there was slightly more to me getting the push than just the
arguement,,the tutors at the school were excellent with the exception of one
(head of second year paint)we didnt get on at all at all,,,the rest is
history and i`d do it all again,,just for the record things in ireland arent
particulary great at the moment,everybody seems to be leaning on the same
brush and are trying to paint to an ideal irish aesthetic(boring)think
abstract galway bay,seaweed etc(just in case you began to wonder)says me
if anyone has any ideas on battle pictures(or murals)could ye please
say,says me
Alison A Raimes
<mack...@hotmail.com> writes
>> > you asked about my school,i went to limerick r.t.c.(ireland)for two
>years and had three years eduacation prior to that,served five years to my
>time,,there was slightly more to me getting the push than just the
>arguement,,the tutors at the school were excellent with the exception of one
>(head of second year paint)we didnt get on at all at all,,,the rest is
>history and i`d do it all again,,just for the record things in ireland arent
>particulary great at the moment,everybody seems to be leaning on the same
>brush and are trying to paint to an ideal irish aesthetic(boring)think
>abstract galway bay,seaweed etc(just in case you began to wonder)says me
You see, now I can put an accent to your post ! Anyway, I heard the art
scene in Ireland was buzzing - in fact one of my art history tutors at
Manchester tried to pursuade me to do my MFA in Belfast .... well I
don't mind a bit of heat but in the line of real gunfire ? maybe not.
Perhaps things in Southern Ireland are different ? to be honest, I am
pretty ignorant about what is going on in Ireland, particularly in the
art scene. Perhaps, if you have time, you could educate me a little ?
>
>if anyone has any ideas on battle pictures(or murals)could ye please
>say,says me
>
Northern Ireland has tremendous mural art history - what are you
specifically looking for ? Chile, a peripheral country like N.Ireland,
has a history of political *battle* art - many of the murals were
painted over during the Pinochet regime, but much of it has been
documented. Are you interested in modern battle pictures or more
historical stuff ? Let us know and I am sure we can help.
In the meantime how about having a pint of Guinness for us all ?
Cheers !
Alison
ali...@raimes.demon.co.uk
http://www.raimes.demon.co.uk
mdeli
something entirely different from the art of the past. It conforms to
no classical standards (I use the term loosely here).
Stylistically Modern Academic artwork considered the great art of this
century, encompasses not only modern abstraction but also No Skill
Realism (NSR). This is work which though critically considered modern
art, contains instantly recognizable images.
The best place to sample lots of ordinary sub-furniture store no skill
realism is right here on the web. But this realism, even when
accompanied by a hard hitting manifesto which hardly anyone reads,
rarely has any real Modern Academic Art power.
The Important NSR I am referring to here is praised as great art and
hangs in museums near our acclaimed abstract masters because it
presents them with no challenge.
The main characteristics of NSR are abominable drawing and a strong
dose of schmier (preferably impasto). This is termed by critics as
anything from abstract distortion all the way to the fourth dimension,
in many more words of course.
Great art status for NSR started in this century with the works of
classical Modern Academics from Matisse (the most important of the
lot) and Picasso and advanced through the worst of Expressionism and
on to our presently fashionable big canvas realist potzers like
Hockney and Rivers etc.
This alone shows that we are not in a century of pure abstraction.
Even the claims of de Kooning experts attest to this. No one could say
that his Keane like goo-goo eyes and occasional naughty parts aren't
recognizable.
Most people are not offended by pure abstraction in the visual sense.
Mondrian, Kandinski, Pollock, Rothko etc. certainly have a graphic
attraction equal to that of nice towels. By comparison the master
works of NSR are more often than not, no sight for sore eyes.
After many years of flat Greenbergian asceticism, NSR is again OK in
critical eyes. This, as long as it contains lots of drawing errors,
remains mindlessly simplistic, doesn't tell any stories (lest it be
labeled illustration) and has an abstract section (a few obvious flat
schmiers). Oh yes it has to come in mega-sizes so that the pretense of
importance equals any nearby abstraction and the artists' incompetence
is made instantly apparent.
…If it doesn't look like a put-on it won't make it as great modern
art.
Mani DeLi
...no skill no art
A Skeptical View of Modern Art was updated Jan.16,99
check out my new book, new work, new comments at:.
http://www.interlog.com/~hugod/
Charles Eicher
>
>Well, ye could pirate Rembrant, for starters. I thought this was a pretty
>funny example that Charles used, considering that R died a pauper after being
>the hightest paid artist in Europe in his day.
Hey, leave me out of this, I didn't make that comment, you're misattributing it.
Kay
Charles Eicher wrote in message <7m8qfd$2d...@edrn.newsguy.com>...
:In article <3787DE9A...@tomatoweb.com>, "Erik says...
But - the reason he died a pauper wasn't specifically due to his declining
art appeal of the time, but more because he made terrible investments and
was horrible with financial affairs. I have an interesting list of items he
was forced to sell to pay off his myriad of debts and it seems he was quite
the art collector himself.
Kay
"Do you know what he needs? Two or three shock treatments,"
Mary George said. "Get that artist business right out of his head once
and for all." (from "An Enduring Chill" by Flannery O'Connor)
:
Erik A. Mattila
funny example that Charles used, considering that R died a pauper after being
this happened, but the thing to keep in mind was the conservative Calvinists
'tolerated' R for many years - his bohemianism (hung out with all the 'wrong'
people) and even sleeping with his maid. So one theory why they turned on him
and fleeced him (he was a 'chain' borrower) was the single painting "The
Shooting Company of Banning Cocq" aka "The Night Watch." These shooting
compaines were survivals of the battles between Amsterdam and the Duke of
Orange, but by the mid 17c. had degenerated to men's clubs. A lot of very
important and wealthy and powerful Amsterdamers got real pissed with R. painted
the back of their heads, departing from the "Dutch Master Cigar" tradition for
group portraiture. Shortly after Rs creditors moved in and repossessed all his
property (he had the largest art library and the largest armour collection in
Europe at the time). When cataloging his stuff, the creidtors found several
uncashed checks that R had used for bookmarks - enough to pay all his debts
about three times over. They just seized these also, and hounded the man until
his death. At one point he opened an art supply shop in the name of his son,
Titus, but they took him to court on that and took that too. He died with a
net worth of about 6 (Dutch) cents.
Was he a genius? What the hell is a genius, anyway? R wrote that it was
nearly impossible to be innovative in art, and at best an artist could hope to
push tradition a bit in a new direction. But sure, he's a genius, if you
consider that a 'genius' is what society says is a 'genius' and there's not too
much more to it than that. Whichever way you shake it, bake it, rock it and
roll it, some carpenters, auto mechanics, brain surgeons, accountaints, farm
workers or whatever are also geniuses -- considering that some people get very
good at what they are doing. Yet society reserves the category 'genius' for
specific 'stylish and favored' activities, and a carpenter who can 'sense'
pythagorean geometry on the job or a farm worker who can repair a combine with
a strand of onion root are called 'idiot savants.'
There's also an interesting relationship between 'genius' and 'press.' The
concept of genius, in society, gets pushed more and more into the terrain of
popular culture as modern industrial civilization 'progresses(?).'
Erik Mattila
Erik A. Mattila
Erik
Charles Eicher wrote:
> In article <3787DE9A...@tomatoweb.com>, "Erik says...
> >
> >Well, ye could pirate Rembrant, for starters. I thought this was a pretty
> >funny example that Charles used, considering that R died a pauper after being
> >the hightest paid artist in Europe in his day.
>
Alison A Raimes
<mack...@hotmail.com> writes
>well i dunno like,its want and not brain that gets things done,thats the way
>of the world,,you telling me you cant learn to paint like mucha,sean keating
>or even millas or durer or something,,as far as i can make out rembrant only
>used something like a hundred and one glazes to kill rawness and sort
>edges,if i started tomorrow with the intention that someday if i wanted hard
>enough i could paint like rembrant then someday maybe twenty years time i
>will be able to paint like rembrant,if i want hard enough and try and stick
>an extra bit of brain into figuring it out,i mightnt be able to paint like
>turner or draw like michaelangelo but i will be able to paint like rembrant,
>or whoever i put my mind to,its just it might take years,if i cant then its
>because i havent wanted hard enough,its all about knowing your materials
>anyway because anybody with good eyesight and entusiasim can draw.i dunno
>,just enjoy what you do,says me,
You are right and this is being proven in Universities in the US today -
Tony Buzan covers a lot of this ground in his books about drawing from
the right side of the brain and making the most of your mind. How do you
think that sportsmen become so good, or doctors become great surgeons ?
Its a matter of focusing the brain and very few people are capable of it
- the distractions of modern day life prevent us from doing this. We
have the capabilities to learn whatever we want and a lot of it is
decided for us at a very young age. If your parents encouraged you to do
art then you got a head start - the process becomes *instinct*.
Genius is a ridiculous term - one which has fitted nicely into the myth
of artist standing outside society and one that we are in awe of and
therefore long for. We always seem to long for the things we cannot
have/be. Why would anyone want to paint like Rembrandt ? to prove he
could do it ? what purpose would that serve ?
Art has become a non stop competition - everyone fighting to get to the
top of Brancusi's pyramid and knocking others aside when in reality
there is room for all down in the fields below. That's what modern day
life is like, period.
Andrew/macker is right - just do it, enjoy it, and if you can sell
enough to pay for you to be in the studio doing what you love best then
so be it - but don't count on it ! The great thing about that is that
you can spend your time focused and learning and developing your art -
and that inevitably will make you feel great - isn't that what life is
really about ? Being happy ?
Jewel
>> > first thanks for saying one or two things i needed to hear
>> i recognised a few things,says me
thentrythisonforsizeandseehowmuchyourecognize
andthereatlastitwasnomorerealismnomorerepresentationalobjectsno
morelinescolorsformsandcontoursnomorepigmentsnomore
brushstrokesnomoreevocationsnomoreframeswallsgalleries museumsno
moregnawingatthetorturedfaceofthegodflatnessno more
audiencerequiredjustareceiverthatmayormaynotbeapersonormayor
maynotbethereatallnomoreegoprojectedjustthe
artistinthethirdpersonwhomaybeanyoneornooneatallfornothingis
demandedofhimnothingatallnotevenexistenceforthatgotlostinthe
subjunctivemodeandinthatmomentofabsolutelydispassionate
abdicationofinsouciantwitheringawayartmadeitsfinalflightclimbed
higherandhigherinaneverdecreasingtighterturningspiraluntilwithone
lastergoffreedomonelastdendriticsynapseitdisappearedupitsown
fundamentalapertureandcameouttheothersideasarttheoryarttheory
pureandsimplewordsonapageliteratureundefiledbyvisionflatflatter
flattestavisioninvisibleevenineffableasineffableastheangelsandthe
universalsoulsfromtomwolfespaintedword
william crain
come see us at www.artcalendar.comnews:7m29ec$atg$1...@scotty.tinet.ie...
Peter Nelson
andrew mc sweeney wrote in message <7m29ec$atg$1...@scotty.tinet.ie>...
>hello from new person,reading through i read something about genius in
>art,how much of art nowadays is just hysterical talented self
congradulatory
>pastche,faux pas correct,has anybody thought about moba(self taught)art,i
blah, blah, blah.
You'll have a hard time convincing anyone that your style of
self-expression - no paragraphs, no capitalization, bad
punctuation, and movie-pirate syntax (e.g., "says me", "I reckon") -
isn't just another gimmick.
Language is a tool for communication. If you were serious
about communicating your ideas you would use language in
a way to make your ideas clear. Since that's not what you're
doing then we have to wonder what your real motives are in posting
this.
---peter
Peter H.M. Brooks
plne...@mediaone.net "Peter Nelson" writes:
>
> Language is a tool for communication. If you were serious
> about communicating your ideas you would use language in
> a way to make your ideas clear. Since that's not what you're
> doing then we have to wonder what your real motives are in posting
> this.
>
An excellent point made very clearly!
--
Peter H.M. Brooks
Alison A Raimes
Nelson <plne...@mediaone.net> writes
>blah, blah, blah.
>
>You'll have a hard time convincing anyone that your style of
>self-expression - no paragraphs, no capitalization, bad
>punctuation, and movie-pirate syntax (e.g., "says me", "I reckon") -
>isn't just another gimmick.
>
>Language is a tool for communication. If you were serious
>about communicating your ideas you would use language in
>a way to make your ideas clear. Since that's not what you're
>doing then we have to wonder what your real motives are in posting
>this.
>
This may or may not be. But tell me: would you or *Jewel, the gemstone
in the rough* (ROFL) attack someone who may be disabled or educationally
impaired without giving the benefit of the doubt ? There may/will be
reasons why this poster doesn't have your level of academic *finesse*.
You know nothing about this poster and yet your usual superior attitudes
have condemned him without a fair trial. People like you make me sick.
Alison
ali...@raimes.demon.co.uk
http://www.raimes.demon.co.uk
Peter Nelson
Alison A Raimes wrote in message ...
>In article <Oq6i3.19023$Wr1.4...@wbnws01.ne.mediaone.net>, Peter
>Nelson <plne...@mediaone.net> writes
>
>>blah, blah, blah.
>>
>>You'll have a hard time convincing anyone that your style of
>>self-expression - no paragraphs, no capitalization, bad
>>punctuation, and movie-pirate syntax (e.g., "says me", "I reckon") -
>>isn't just another gimmick.
>>
>>Language is a tool for communication. If you were serious
>>about communicating your ideas you would use language in
>>a way to make your ideas clear. Since that's not what you're
>>doing then we have to wonder what your real motives are in posting
>>this.
>>
>
>This may or may not be. But tell me: would you or *Jewel, the gemstone
>in the rough* (ROFL) attack someone who may be disabled or educationally
>impaired without giving the benefit of the doubt ?
Paragraphs, capitalization, and punctuation are common in
every type of published writing from advertising, to newspapers,
to beginning reading primers to novels. Six-year olds already
grasp the basics. And the poster's vocabulary shows that he
is no stranger to language. So don't be naive. There is no
sort of educational deficit which could account for his not being
familiar with these things. His writing is a deliberate affectation.
>
There may/will be
>reasons why this poster doesn't have your level of academic *finesse*.
>You know nothing about this poster and yet your usual superior attitudes
>have condemned him without a fair trial. People like you make me sick.
His words and writing condemn him. I simply call attention to
them. You're being naive if you think anything else.
---peter
Kay
"Peter H.M. Brooks" wrote in message <931722...@psyche.demon.co.uk>...
:In article <Oq6i3.19023$Wr1.4...@wbnws01.ne.mediaone.net>
: plne...@mediaone.net "Peter Nelson" writes:
:
:>
:> Language is a tool for communication. If you were serious
:> about communicating your ideas you would use language in
:> a way to make your ideas clear. Since that's not what you're
:> doing then we have to wonder what your real motives are in posting
:> this.
:An excellent point made very clearly!
:
:--
:Peter H.M. Brooks
Both of you are being very unfair IMO. I tend to ignore language, grammar
and punctuation here for the simple fact that some posters, Lauri L. and
Bobig to name a couple are posting from countries in which English is a
second language. We don't know what country a person is communicating from.
Secondly, I'm reading this as some sort of testosterone laden pissing
contest since Andrew is assumedly a male, yet I've seen neither of you
object to "Artist" aka "Mattison" destruction of the English language, which
is her first (perhaps only) language. Compared to Artist's posts, Andrew
could be a professor of writing at a top university.
Kay
:
Erik A. Mattila
didn't want him to 'abuse' the language so they were continually rewriting
his books. I think he had to fight for his territorial imperative till his
dying day on that score. I accidentally found this out when I checked out a
very thick copy of "Apocalypse" from a library. The edition included the
essay as Lawrene had written it, full of intended errors and ommissions, as
well as a 'published' version that was 'cleaned up.' There was a remarkable
difference - as if it were two different books (almost).
This same problem is also rampant within "Indian Literature" (Native
American). All the autobiographies (except for some very recent ones) have
been 'cleaned up' by editors and interviewers, such as John Niehart. The
problem with this is that the so-called 'pidgin english' that a lot of
Indians use is in itself a language, quite distinct from any of the formal
English forms we cite as 'correct.' "Correcting' this has created a
literature that was never intended by the author (the Indian) and the
misunderstanding that results is quite profound. Black Elk, for example,
agreed to tell Niehart about his role in the Custer battle, nothing more,
nothing less. The great 'visions' were in large a product of Neihart's
imagination. I suppose Neihart would claim that Black Elk would have said
somethng similar if he had agreed to talk about the spirit stuff.
Personally, I liked Sweeny's style. It was like comic book narrative, which
is quite popular, anyway. This is an 'art group', after all. I've seen
quite a few 'art cops' here, and now we have 'talk cops' too. I surrender
(turn meself in, innit?)
Erik Mattila
Peter Nelson wrote:
> Alison A Raimes wrote in message ...
> >In article <Oq6i3.19023$Wr1.4...@wbnws01.ne.mediaone.net>, Peter
> >Nelson <plne...@mediaone.net> writes
> >
> >>blah, blah, blah.
> >>
> >>You'll have a hard time convincing anyone that your style of
> >>self-expression - no paragraphs, no capitalization, bad
> >>punctuation, and movie-pirate syntax (e.g., "says me", "I reckon") -
> >>isn't just another gimmick.
> >>
> >>Language is a tool for communication. If you were serious
> >>about communicating your ideas you would use language in
> >>a way to make your ideas clear. Since that's not what you're
> >>doing then we have to wonder what your real motives are in posting
> >>this.
> >>
> >
Alison A Raimes
Nelson <plne...@mediaone.net> writes
>His words and writing condemn him. I simply call attention to
>them. You're being naive if you think anything else.
>
>
>---peter
And that is his choice. Several of my cyber friends also type like that
- I have never asked them why because I am only interested in what they
have to say. I just skimmed through talk.philosophy.humanism and noted
that several of the contributors type exactly as Andrew does and haven't
noticed a single person on that newsgroup objecting. Why is that ?
I prefer to remain naive until I have some more knowledge about him
other than he is posting from Ireland but has a Scottish name. He may be
taking the piss or it may be that he has never used a computer before or
has learning disabilities or his first language is Gaelic... or a
combination. It makes absolutely no difference to me - he has something
to say and wants to find someone to say it to and should not be excluded
on the grounds of grammar or vocabulary. The last person you attacked
for this was a professor of art and philosophy for 35 years - who cares
not about how something is written but what the person is saying.
As far as I can see Andrew is frustrated with the art world and people
like you and ms *jeweljillianmayflowersmaypohlaprilshowerspinkypermeated
bluemoonabbysieze*. I am sure if we ask him he will tell us the whole
story. In the meantime lets give him and anyone else who posts here and
doesn't have your level of intellect (insert sarcasm), the chance to be
included without crushing his confidence further than the education
system already has.
Alison
ali...@raimes.demon.co.uk
http://www.raimes.demon.co.uk
Peter H.M. Brooks
scarl...@theriver.com "Kay" writes:
>
> Both of you are being very unfair IMO. I tend to ignore language, grammar
> and punctuation here for the simple fact that some posters, Lauri L. and
> Bobig to name a couple are posting from countries in which English is a
> second language. We don't know what country a person is communicating from.
> Secondly, I'm reading this as some sort of testosterone laden pissing
> contest since Andrew is assumedly a male, yet I've seen neither of you
> object to "Artist" aka "Mattison" destruction of the English language, which
> is her first (perhaps only) language. Compared to Artist's posts, Andrew
> could be a professor of writing at a top university.
>
I am not meaning to be unfair, nor to enter a pissing contest. I didn't
make an assumption about the sex of the poster. I know quite a few posters
who make their posts difficult for others to read as a deliberate affectation,
and I find it very bad mannered of them.
I didn't make the original criticism, I simply supported the criticism - if
the criticism was aimed at the wrong target [which is possible, as you say],
I would still say that it was a good criticism of the general problem.
Obviously people whose second language is English are to be congratulated
for posting in English, not condemned for doing it badly!
--
Peter H.M. Brooks
Peter H.M. Brooks
emat...@tomatoweb.com "Erik A. Mattila" writes:
>
> This same problem is also rampant within "Indian Literature" (Native
> American). All the autobiographies (except for some very recent ones) have
> been 'cleaned up' by editors and interviewers, such as John Niehart. The
> problem with this is that the so-called 'pidgin english' that a lot of
> Indians use is in itself a language, quite distinct from any of the formal
> English forms we cite as 'correct.'
>
Pidgins are a form of language used to communicate between people who don't
share a common language. They are not fully formed languages as nobody uses
them as their first language. For a language to move from a pidgin to a
creole, at least one generation needs to grow up with it as a first language -
this has happened with some sign languages for the deaf that are fully formed
creoles. So, if somebody communicates with you in pidgin they are, by definition
translating from their own language, so it is legitimate, and polite, to
render their communication in good English. If they communicate in a creole,
or full language, then you would need a full translation.
>
> Personally, I liked Sweeny's style. It was like comic book narrative, which
> is quite popular, anyway. This is an 'art group', after all. I've seen
> quite a few 'art cops' here, and now we have 'talk cops' too. I surrender
> (turn meself in, innit?)
>
A short extract in that style to make a point is fair enough, whole posts
in the style are simply difficult to read and bad manners in consequence -
if they are deliberate.
--
Peter H.M. Brooks
her...@linknet.com.au
----------
In article <7m7ft2$h61$1...@scotty.tinet.ie>, "andrew mc sweeney"
<mack...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> well i dunno like,its want and not brain that gets things done,thats the way
> of the world,,you telling me you cant learn to paint like mucha,sean keating
> or even millas or durer or something,,as far as i can make out rembrant only
> used something like a hundred and one glazes to kill rawness and sort
> edges,if i started tomorrow with the intention that someday if i wanted hard
> enough i could paint like rembrant then someday maybe twenty years time i
> will be able to paint like rembrant,if i want hard enough and try and stick
> an extra bit of brain into figuring it out,i mightnt be able to paint like
> turner or draw like michaelangelo but i will be able to paint like rembrant,
> or whoever i put my mind to,its just it might take years,if i cant then its
> because i havent wanted hard enough,its all about knowing your materials
> anyway because anybody with good eyesight and entusiasim can draw.i dunno
> ,just enjoy what you do,says me,
>
Personally I don't buy the idea that we can do anything if we just try hard
enough. Perhaps we could learn to paint in a similar manner to an artist -
but the incredible drawing and ease in rembrandt, and even more the
incredible sensitivity of his seeing - you can't just assume that you can
learn this.
I'm not necessarily arguing the case for genius, I wouldn't know how to
define it if it exists. But to pretend that everyone's capacity is
equal... it's obviously not true.
Zom
Erik A. Mattila
an English of the future, where all sorts of bizarrare contractions and mutations
have occurred - the change of language over time. He played it to the hilt, also,
and at times it was very challenging to the reader . ( I remember that the
philosopher Francis Bacon was reffered to as 'The Hog,' and it took a bit of time
to figure that one out.)
"Creole" is a new term for me -- I have never run across it used in this context.
Very interesting - itself a good example of language use and abuse. My
understanding of the term itself is contradictory. A 'Creole' in Mexican sociology
for example (which is the earliest form of the term that I know of) refers to a
Spaniard who was born in Nueva Espana. (A Spainiard who lived in N.E., but was born
in Spain, was a 'Peninsular.') But in US vernacular, a 'creole' is a person of
mixed blood, African and Europoean, residing in the Louisianna Purchase area,
notibly New Orleans.
At any rate I did use scarecrows for 'pidgen' and I agree with you that I'm not
taliing about Native American pidgen english. Throughout Native communities in
North America forms have developed that are in fact 'first languages' and from this
the critical problem arises. At its base is a hermeneutics, or course, but the
complaint that arises among a young generation of Native American critiics is that
the editorial impulse, applied from the hegemony of 'good English' has rendered the
"Indian autobiography" completely distorted. But you're right, a 'translation' is
needed to correct this.
I find this to be a fascinating issue because it can spill over to visual
representations as well. We've seen the ever-present tendency here on RAF to
impose a 'standard' on visual representations, often the very 'standard' that
artists have historically defied and challenged. Many artists who begin to do this
produce works that appear corney, contrived and 'affected' originally, but with
patient development and maturity are able to make it work. So what is the better
role to play as the critic? The one who cites standards and critically holds the
work to these (which may completely devastate, embarrass and discourage the artist
from any sort of experimental work) or the critic who encourages innovation and
experiments, or at least supports the ideology of self development? As I wrote
this I thought of a book I read (partially) which was a collection of letters
between T.S. Eliot and Ezra Pound. Quite fascinating, as they were discussing
these kinds of things - I mean the legitimacy of pushing language, and how fine a
line there is between creativity and unintelligibility, success and failure.
I suppose the next step here is to discuss the propriety of Virgil and Dante
'digressing' to Mantuan street talk, eh?
Erik Mattila
andrew mc sweeney
Alison A Raimes <ali...@address.in.signature> wrote in message
I heard the art
scene in Ireland was buzzing etc,
i pretty much hear the same thing,i dunno the story with dublin but
cork,galway and limerick are ok,if you wanted to be surrounded by it
twentyfour hours a day seven days a week you could,artists in limerick have
a very good profile,i can think of four maybe five galleries straight off
and the people are nice,the place is small so you can make an impression,its
pretty artist friendly,accomadation is cheap and its near the west of
ireland,i spent an enjoyable couple(thats two,for anyone with
difficulties)there,the place is well worth it,i really really loved limerick
a lot but i missed my family so i returned to cork and havent picked up a
brush since but i`m starting to get warm again about it,a matter of
time,,galway i dunno,i`ve two completely galways ,one i like the other i
detest,its supposed to be the place,galway arts festival and all that,what
i`m saying is strictly from an ordinary persons perspective,theres stuff
that`d bug ya,i see a lot of stuff thats exactly what was taught in school
and i reckon theres people who follow this to the letter,theyre taught to
paint a certain way and they never go beyond this,its kinda like "if you
paint this way you`ll get to show in a gallery and if you dont paint this
way then you wont"some of the stuff do be good granted,but some stuff dont
be good at all,especially that installation stuff,things dont be questioned
at all,it do be the same old dingy dong over and over again,it wouldnt
happen to be an irish abstract landscape would it,there do be stuff a lot
worse than that,its like theres a new irishness being created around
galwayness and its crap,not a bit of the old indiginious in it,i`m irish as
irish can be so i`m very hostile regards some stuff,i havent been around art
circles for about two and a half years so there might have to be a bit of
give on what i say,cork(my home)if youre any bit funny at all you`ll be
killed straight out,theres a certain kind of people who just arent tolerated
at all,cork is very hardline,i`m talking about the local people and not the
art circles,you can get lost in cork though,i`m not as up on the cork scene
as i should be ,cork has a homo community and they kind of latch onto
things,there do be a funny smelly around some places,it could be just me,one
things for sure though ,cork will wreck you depending on your
perspective,i`ll be hitting the road again soon so i`ll make sure i get my
facts and figures right,like i said i dunno are the hommo`s around the place
hanging onto things,its really embarrassing because i`m as cork as cork can
be and seeing these people makes me wanna cry,whats worse is they`re loud
and vocal,corks funny,feelings can run high and you`d just wanna be on the
right side of the fence,some places you avoid,i dunno how badly the hommos
are involved,if you come to ireland to work go to limerick,if you come to
ireland to live go to cork(things are very black and white,very,,if you like
watercolous and stuff go to cork,theres oppertunities for paintings
everywhere,corks very scenic,has docks and lots of character,the place is
chocabloc with things you could paint,a watercolourists paradise,the price
of accommadation is prohibitive though,
you asked about battle pictures and stuff,i was thinking along the lines of
grenades and bombs and airoplanes and tanks and the red baron,i dunno do you
know the commando comic books,with the dagger on the back,i reckon they
could be worth collecting,because i dunno if the companies gonna last much
longer,its good you mentioned northern murals the catholic ones do be good
and i have a big interest in war posters and communist posters,i`ll
definately check out chile,
thats all i`m just waiting to be told i`ve put everyone to sleep,andrew
p.s.theres a cup of tea there for ya,dont mind the chip
Jewel <em...@wontwork.com> wrote in message
news:3788a...@oracle.zianet.com...
>
> thentrythisonforsizeandseehowmuchyourecognize etc
whats the story here sham?i con talk the lingo ok big ears,something wrong
with being nice ,would it break your heart to try and understand that,we get
the difference between talking and speaking, ye do be fierce serious,a good
kick in the fannys what you want,wouldnt be long fixing that
squek,understand that pinky,i`ve had dealings with your kind
before-handshake and a nod and by the way your shoes are lovely,no shit in
your eyes speaky-oh hello your farts smell like flowers and when you talk my
ears just wiggle,speaky no talk,ye`re picking up on stupid stuffarooni
,someone else said something about the says me,thats so ye know what has and
hasnt come out my gob,says me,have a good sniff of turps ,wont be long
fixing things,thats what its all about,thats why people paint not so they
can see who`s looking big ears,your`e bought,if you get recognition then
thats a handy bonus,theres ye`re winnings have fun spending it,says me and
i`m sorry for having to be so hard,problem gone problem solved,its okay the
paints dry you can touch it,says me
peter nelson wrote
>Since that's not what you're
doing then we have to wonder what your real motives are in posting
this.
dont bother with that you`ve got a secret shit,that do be fierce
annoying,could get you in trouble,i`m serious about that,honestly,bad
mile,you are what you eat and you cant live on icecream,thats all full stop.
Peter H.M. Brooks
emat...@tomatoweb.com "Erik A. Mattila" writes:
>Did you ever read E.A. Poe's "Mellanta Tauta," Peter? He was attempting to
> invent
>an English of the future, where all sorts of bizarrare contractions and
> mutations
>have occurred - the change of language over time. He played it to the hilt,
> also,
>and at times it was very challenging to the reader . ( I remember that the
>philosopher Francis Bacon was reffered to as 'The Hog,' and it took a bit of
> time
>to figure that one out.)
>
It doesn't ring a bell. There is a little of this type of thing in 'A Clockwork
Orange'.
>
>"Creole" is a new term for me -- I have never run across it used in this
> context.
>Very interesting - itself a good example of language use and abuse. My
>understanding of the term itself is contradictory. A 'Creole' in Mexican
> sociology
>for example (which is the earliest form of the term that I know of) refers to a
>Spaniard who was born in Nueva Espana. (A Spainiard who lived in N.E., but was
> born
>in Spain, was a 'Peninsular.') But in US vernacular, a 'creole' is a person of> mixed blood, African and Europoean, residing in the Louisianna Purchase area,
> notibly New Orleans.
>
You will usually find it as 'creolised' the process of changing from a pidgin
to a language. It fits with the other meanings as creoles in you sense
speak a creole - at least they did when this was being investigated.
>
>the critical problem arises. At its base is a hermeneutics, or course, but the
>complaint that arises among a young generation of Native American critiics is
> that
>the editorial impulse, applied from the hegemony of 'good English' has rendered
> the
>"Indian autobiography" completely distorted. But you're right, a 'translation'
> is
>needed to correct this.
>
I often think that American needs translating into English - but that is
another matter!
>
>I find this to be a fascinating issue because it can spill over to visual
>representations as well. We've seen the ever-present tendency here on RAF to
>impose a 'standard' on visual representations, often the very 'standard' that
>artists have historically defied and challenged. Many artists who begin to do
> this
>produce works that appear corney, contrived and 'affected' originally, but with
>patient development and maturity are able to make it work. So what is the
> better
>role to play as the critic? The one who cites standards and critically holds
> the
>work to these (which may completely devastate, embarrass and discourage the
> artist
>from any sort of experimental work) or the critic who encourages innovation and
>experiments, or at least supports the ideology of self development? As I wrote
> this I thought of a book I read (partially) which was a collection of letters
> between T.S. Eliot and Ezra Pound. Quite fascinating, as they were discussing
> these kinds of things - I mean the legitimacy of pushing language, and how
> fine a
> line there is between creativity and unintelligibility, success and failure.
>
Creativity seems to work best when it grows from tight discipline.
>
> I suppose the next step here is to discuss the propriety of Virgil and Dante
> 'digressing' to Mantuan street talk, eh?
>
I thought that the recent 'Romeo and Juliet' set in 'Verona Beach' made quite
a few interesting points about language and culture.
--
Peter H.M. Brooks
Peter Nelson
>:> Language is a tool for communication. If you were serious
>:> about communicating your ideas you would use language in
>:> a way to make your ideas clear. Since that's not what you're
>:> doing then we have to wonder what your real motives are in posting
>:> this.
>:>
>:An excellent point made very clearly!
>Both of you are being very unfair IMO. I tend to ignore language, grammar
>and punctuation here for the simple fact that some posters, Lauri L. and
>Bobig to name a couple are posting from countries in which English is a
>second language.
But there is no country where the language takes the gimmicky
form this poster used.
I've seen plenty of postings from ESL posters and if they appear
to be sincere I'm happy to overlook a few spelling or grammatical
errors.
Andrew's style of posting is a deliberate affectation.
---peter
Peter Nelson
Alison A Raimes wrote in message ...
>Nelson <plne...@mediaone.net> writes
>
>>His words and writing condemn him. I simply call attention to
>>them. You're being naive if you think anything else.
>>
>>
>>---peter
>
>And that is his choice. Several of my cyber friends also type like that
>- I have never asked them why because I am only interested in what they
>have to say. I just skimmed through talk.philosophy.humanism and noted
>that several of the contributors type exactly as Andrew does and haven't
>noticed a single person on that newsgroup objecting. Why is that ?
Because it's irrelevant that a posting is unreadable if it's content-free
to begin with.
And this is exactly the point. Language, as I noted, is a tool
for communicating. Paragraphs, punctuation, and capitalization
all aid in this. We can only presume that if he really wanted us to
understand his point he would use the features in the language
which enhance that communication.
>As far as I can see Andrew is frustrated with the art world and people
>like you and ms *jeweljillianmayflowersmaypohlaprilshowerspinkypermeated
>bluemoonabbysieze*. I am sure if we ask him he will tell us the whole
>story. In the meantime lets give him and anyone else who posts here and
>doesn't have your level of intellect (insert sarcasm), the chance to be
>included without crushing his confidence further than the education
>system already has.
Oh, good grief. The poor dear. Or as Stephen Sondheim wrote in
West Side Story:
(Tiger, imitating Krupke) Hey you!
(Riff) Who me, Officer Krupke?
(Tiger imitating Krupke) Yeah you. Gimme one good reason for not draggin' ya
down to the station house, ya punk!
(Riff) Dear kindly Sergeant Krupke, you gotta understand
It's just our bringin' upke, that gets us out of hand
Our mothers all are junkies, our fathers all are drunks
Golly Moses, naturally we're punks
(Jets) Gee, Officer Krupke, we're very upset
We never had the love that every child oughta get
We ain't no delinquents, we're misunderstood
Deep down inside us there is good
(Riff) There is good!
(Jets) There is good, there is good, there is untapped good
Like inside, the worst of us is good
(Tiger) That's a touching good story
(Riff) Let me tell it to the world
(Tiger imitating Krupke) Just tell it to the Judge
(Riff) Dear kindly Judge, your Honor, my parents treat me rough
With all their marijuana they won't give me a puff
They didn't wanna have me but somehow I was had
Leapin' lizards, that's why I'm so bad
(Snowboy imitating Judge) Right! Officer Krupke, you're really a square
This boy don't need a judge, he needs an analyst's care
It's just his neurosis, that oughta be curbed
He's psychologically disturbed
(Riff) I'm disturbed
(Jets) We're disturbed, we're disturbed, we're the most disturbed
Like we're psychologically disturbed
(Snowboy imitating Judge) Hear ye, hear ye, in the opinion of this court,
this child is depraved on account he ain't had a normal home.
(Riff) Hey, I'm depraved on account I'm deprived.
(Snowboy imitating Judge) So take him to a Headshrinker. You!
(Action) Who me?
(Riff) My daddy beats my mommy, my mommy clobbers me
['My mother is a bastard, my pa's an S.O.B.' in the stage play]
My grandpa is a commie, my grandma pushes tea
My sister wears a mustache, my brother wears a dress
Goodness gracious, that's why I'm a mess
(Action imitating Headshrinker) Yes, Officer Krupke, he shouldn't be here
This boy don't need a couch, he needs a useful career
Society's played him a terrible trick, and sociologically he's sick
(Riff) I am sick!
(Jets) We are sick, we are sick, we are sick, sick, sick
Like we're sociologically sick
(Action imitating Headshrinker) In my opinion, this child does not need to
have his head shrunk at all. Juvenile delinquency is purely a social
disease.
(Riff) Hey, I got a social disease!
(Action imitating Headshrinker) So take him to a Social Worker
(Riff) Dear kindly Social Worker, they tell me get a job
Like be a soda jerker which means I'd be a slob
It's not I'm antisocial, I'm only anti-work
Glory Osky, that's why I'm a jerk
(A-Rab) Eek, Officer Krupke, you've done it again
This boy don't need a job, he needs a year in the pen
It ain't just a question of misunderstood, deep down inside him he's no good
(Riff) I'm no good
(Jets) We're no good, we're no good, we're no earthly good
Like the best of us is no damn good
The trouble is he's lazy, the trouble is he drinks
The trouble is he's crazy, the trouble is he stinks
The trouble is he's growing, the trouble is he's grown
Krupke, we've got troubles of our own
Officer Krupke, we're down on our knees
(Riff) 'Cause no one wants a fella with a social disease
(Jets) Dear Officer Krupke, what are we to do?
Gee, Officer Krupke, Krup you!
---peter
Kay
Peter Nelson wrote:
:But there is no country where the language takes the gimmicky
:form this poster used.
:
:I've seen plenty of postings from ESL posters and if they appear
:to be sincere I'm happy to overlook a few spelling or grammatical
:errors.
:
:Andrew's style of posting is a deliberate affectation.
:---peter
And the problem with that is????
When I read posts here, I am looking for things pertaining to art, though
sometimes people get off-topic. No problem. I think his posts today with
the hommos taking over Limmerick or Cork was ROTFL funny! I don't know what
he is talking about but it is an interesting respite, to me. Now, I have a
very, very vague idea about the art in Ireland. Some people here never
catch my attention (and no, I'm not talking about you, you've had some very
interesting posts) and I simply always skip them. Try it...
Kay
Peter, I think these signatures at the end, like mine, can be regarded as
affectations, don't you agree? Yet I like it!
~Artist~
Shan...@aol.com
AAR
<mack...@hotmail.com> writes
>you asked about battle pictures and stuff,i was thinking along the lines of
>grenades and bombs and airoplanes and tanks and the red baron,i dunno do you
>know the commando comic books,with the dagger on the back,i reckon they
>could be worth collecting,because i dunno if the companies gonna last much
>longer,its good you mentioned northern murals the catholic ones do be good
>and i have a big interest in war posters and communist posters,i`ll
>definately check out chile,
>thats all i`m just waiting to be told i`ve put everyone to sleep,andrew
>p.s.theres a cup of tea there for ya,dont mind the chip
>
No you didn't put us to sleep - in fact I think you may have woken some
-people up (I expect you've sussed out the boring stuffed shirt brigade
for yourself, eh.)
Cup of tea ? thanks .... watch those chips though there can be some
nasty bugs lurking.
Andrew, you will have trouble finding stuff on Chile unless you have
access to a very specialised library. The most famous murals were those
done by a left wing group calling themselves the 'Brigado Ramona Parra'.
Communist propaganda style murals, resembling a cross between the work
of Picasso in the 1930's and American comic strips. Unfortunately, most
of their works were painted over during the Pinochet regime, though many
were documented and published later also. Several of the Mexican
muralists works have survived, particularly those of David Alfaro
Siqueiros, but the content is less politically challenging so was
allowed to remain. If you are interested I could let you have some stuff
by post or as jpegs - not through hotmail I don't think, so write me at
my Email address below with an address if you want. Also, if you are
interested in those Commando comic book there are a lot of fares who
sell them here in London - I would be happy to pick some up for you.
Are you familiar with the work of the American, James Rosenquist ? I
find his work very *tame* but maybe it could be worth checking him out.
Your honesty is brilliant - so unusual these days ! As for the gay scene
in Cork - I always find that where there is a gay scene there is always
a lot of energy and celebration - god knows they have some celebrating
to do after so much repression. Maybe next time you find yourself in
that sort of area you could think about how honest you are and how
difficult it must be for others to live lies based on their sexual
preference ? Their new found freedom is worth a celebratory drink or two
isn't it ?
Alison
ali...@raimes.demon.co.uk
andrew mc sweeney
From: Erik A. Mattila <emat...@tomatoweb.com>
Newsgroups: rec.arts.fine
Sent: Monday, July 12, 1999 9:14 AM
Subject: Re: wheres art going, whats next?more gimmickism
>
>
>
often the very 'standard' that
> artists have historically defied and challenged. Many artists who begin
to do this
> produce works that appear corney, contrived and 'affected' originally, but
with
> patient development and maturity are able to make it work. So what is the
better
> role to play as the critic? The one who cites standards and critically
holds the
> work to these (which may completely devastate, embarrass and discourage
the artist
> from any sort of experimental work) or the critic who encourages
innovation and
> experiments, or at least supports the ideology of self development>
>
> Erik Mattila
>
> "Peter H.M. Brooks" wrote:
>
> > In article <3789657F...@tomatoweb.com>
> > emat...@tomatoweb.com "Erik A. Mattila" writes:
> >
> > >
quite distinct from any of the formal
> > > English forms we cite as 'correct.'
> > >
. So, if somebody communicates with you in pidgin they are, by definition
> > translating from their own language, so it is legitimate, and polite, to
> > render their communication in good English. If they communicate in a
creole,
> > or full language, then you would need a full translation.
> > >
> > -->impose a 'standard' on visual representations, often the very
'standard' that
>artists have historically defied and challenged. Many artists who begin to
do
> this
>produce works that appear corney, contrived and 'affected' originally, but
with
>patient development and maturity are able to make it work.
> > Peter H.M. Brooks
>
i think ye get a lot of what i was argueing about,some of it hit the nail on
the head. also what i was kind of driving at is something like this,you cant
teach a white man to dance like a blackman,its like a blackman goes into
college and is taught to paint like a whiteman(i`m not questioning
draftsmanship) then he`s told he should try and paint like a black man after
all the blackness has been taken out,if first day he was told to develop his
black style of"dancing"then surely at the end of his time this genius would
be better than the genius the art colleges encourage((zom)),how many artists
are obcessesed with the stiffyness factor(or theirown personel and unique
insight) of their work(i blame picassos myth)how many artists see their work
in terms of stiffyness,how many artists are trying to paint like the
blackman,i dunno,i was just having a stab at whats being thought at art
college,what is art?who`s the man that says this is art and this isnt
art,,i`ll tell you who the man is,business,business is the man,a look at a
typical get ahead art student,i am a robot ,i must work to an ethic,i must
work this way so business will buy my work,this is what business
expects,whats worse is these robots who are programmed in picasso and work
ethic and who have never just sat down and asked themselves(i know this for
an absolutely garanteeable certifiable fact)what is art,art is what the
business says it is,i`m not painting a work i`m painting a compromise,if i
had my way the work ethic and art would have absolutely nothing whatsoever
to do with each other,((alison))
the same thing from another angle,we get music,we get the difference between
take that and something like mozart or polka or afrikan jungle music,take
that isnt music,take this take that,its what sells,merit isnt an issue,there
is a difference between art and hack,what they`re taught in college is hack
not art and if little jimmy hendrix says pop to me i`ll break his neck,well
in a few years these will be the people in power shooting down the the
little blackman ,the real genius,y`know has there been an abstraction on
abstraction,has business abstracted art into something resembling a
profession,its wrong,business shouldnt take precedence over art,same shit
different day,if anyones still here reading this and theyre wondering what
my own leanings are then it`d be somewhere around the german
expressionists,van goghs the man,like if i was to go into an art gallery and
i was to say hang up my stuff theres a chances i`d be told to go away(i wont
be exhibition ready for another two or three years) it`d probably social
commentry(i am uniquely qualified and cannot be touched there) but i know it
will be jugded in terms of its picassoness,is picasso art defined,is the
potential we who hope to be artists should be seeing one of business and
picasso,is that the goal and standard we should be hoping to achieve,i dunno
,i reckon the most you can ever hope to achieve is to be considered
noteworthy,well the bugs good ,talks talk and walks walk,problems
problems,andrew
peter nelson wrote
Andrew's style of posting is a deliberate affectation
no answer to that really,says me,
whats the correct way i should have said that,affectionally speaking,says me
Kay wrote,
plenty
thank you,says andrew
"Get that artist business right out of his head once
and for all."
could be right but then i`d have nothing to get mad about.art might be full
of problems -but what a problem to have,says andrew
artist wrote
u4gotdprtabtgred
comeabitclosertothescreen-forgotwhat?
sorryit didntrhyme
has anybody got any ideas for hitting the arts council
andrews writing
i`ll take this oppertunity to explain things once and for all ,its like this
,when i think i talk to myself,often i get mad,when i get mad i usually have
an argueable arguement at the end of it,ye`re getting the lot now here,i try
to explain in the simplist manner possible because i think thats the least
you can do for people,its like when i try form an idea into words i try and
picture the person i`m talking to,the words i use are the words i use when
talking to someone(i`ve never in my life been asked to repeat what it was
i`ve just said,i dont give a shit about making it sound clever,intellegent
or funny,all that concerns me is the simplist explaination which hopefully
makes it easier to possibly progress and actually get somewhere in an
arguement ,which may throw up new ideas and new arguements,if ye can imagine
two men in the pub having an arguement about football(thats soccer for any
gays reading) then it might explain things better,i more or less reckon that
if its good enough for the pub then it should be good enough here,thanks
people who said good things,the paints dry,also ye can throw stuff all day
,some people just cant be slighted,so feel free to bang away,also if anybody
knows the name of any war artists(esp,ww2)please say,says me
Kay
andrew mc sweeney wrote:
(snip)
:i think ye get a lot of what i was argueing about,some of it hit the nail
on
:the head. also what i was kind of driving at is something like this,you
cant
:teach a white man to dance like a blackman,its like a blackman goes into
:college and is taught to paint like a whiteman(i`m not questioning
:draftsmanship) then he`s told he should try and paint like a black man
:after all the blackness has been taken out,if first day he was told to
:develop his black style of"dancing"
Picasso, amongst others, as well as cubism was directly influenced by
African sculpture and they were white men. Now a black man will be
influenced by the *white* way of painting or making art because the black
man is not in a seperate culture but is integrated within the *white*
culture. Most black artists I know learn the *white/European* tradition and
then use what they have learned and integrate it with their own experiences
and visions of being *black* which does result in a different type of art.
Most of the art that I have seen (in painting) is very social/political and
deals with racial issues - very powerful.
(snipping where you lost me)
:take this take that,its what sells,merit isnt an issue,there is a
difference :between art and hack,what they`re taught in college is hack not
art
What do you mean, give some examples please?
: and if little jimmy hendrix says pop to me i`ll break his neck,
Sorry, but then I'll have to have Janis Joplin kick your arse!
:well in a few years these will be the people in power shooting down the
:the little blackman ,the real genius,y`know has there been an abstraction
:on abstraction,has business abstracted art into something resembling a
:profession,its wrong,business shouldnt take precedence over art,same :shit
different day,if anyones still here reading this and theyre wondering :what
my own leanings are then it`d be somewhere around the german
:expressionists,van goghs the man,like if i was to go into an art gallery
and
:i was to say hang up my stuff theres a chances i`d be told to go away
There's not a chance, it is likely. But, you need to read Dan's post. You
need to find the right gallery.
:(i wont be exhibition ready for another two or three years) it`d probably
:social commentry(i am uniquely qualified and cannot be touched there)
What makes you "uniquely qualified?" I am curious...
: but i know it will be jugded in terms of its picassoness,is picasso art
:defined,is the potential we who hope to be artists should be seeing one of
:business and picasso,is that the goal and standard we should be hoping :to
achieve,i
Who is putting this stuff into your head? The people coming out of art
schools today do work that looks nothing like Picasso.
:dunno,i reckon the most you can ever hope to achieve is to be considered
:noteworthy,well the bugs good ,talks talk and walks walk,problems
:problems,andrew
:has anybody got any ideas for hitting the arts council
Ethnic or Millenium projects are hot right now. Community-based projects.
:andrews writing
:i`ll take this oppertunity to explain things once and for all ,its like
this
:,when i think i talk to myself,often i get mad,when i get mad i usually
have
:an argueable arguement at the end of it,ye`re getting the lot now here,i
try
:to explain in the simplist manner possible because i think thats the least
:you can do for people,its like when i try form an idea into words i try and
:picture the person i`m talking to,the words i use are the words i use when
:talking to someone(i`ve never in my life been asked to repeat what it was
:i`ve just said,i dont give a shit about making it sound clever,intellegent
:or funny,all that concerns me is the simplist explaination which hopefully
:makes it easier to possibly progress and actually get somewhere in an
:arguement ,which may throw up new ideas and new arguements,if ye can
:imagine two men in the pub having an arguement about football(thats :soccer
for anygays reading)
You need to explain about football/soccer to the Americans too. (And some of
them aren't gay, ya know...)
: then it might explain things better,i more or less reckon that if its good
:enough for the pub then it should be good enough here,thanks people :who
said good things,the paints dry,also ye can throw stuff all day,some :people
just cant be slighted,so feel free to bang away,also if anybody :knows the
name of any war artists(esp,ww2)please say,says me
How about Alfred Quiroz for Vietnam war?
Kay
rdav...@my-deja.com
"andrew mc sweeney" <mack...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> peter nelson wrote
> Andrew's style of posting is a deliberate affectation
>
> no answer to that really,says me,
> whats the correct way i should have said that,affectionally
speaking,says me
>
The correct way is there is no correct way, says I.
A pat on the back for Andrew and lets have another round.
ARdee
>
Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/
Share what you know. Learn what you don't.
andrew mc sweeney
Kay <scarl...@theriver.com> wrote in message
news:7Ebj3.37507$AU3.7...@news2.giganews.com...
>
:develop his black style of"dancing"said me
>
> Picasso, amongst others, as well as cubism was directly influenced by
> African sculpture and they were white men. Now a black man will be
> influenced by the *white* way of painting or making art because the black
> man is not in a seperate culture but is integrated within the *white*
> culture. Most black artists I know learn the *white/European* tradition
and
> then use what they have learned and integrate it with their own
experiences
> and visions of being *black* which does result in a different type of art.
> Most of the art that I have seen (in painting) is very social/political
and
> deals with racial issues - very powerful.
>
to be a blackman,and thats my point exactly,take him out of the jungle,dress
him in clothes and tell him to paint or leave him in the jungle,supply him
with materials and tell him paint from there,a jungle man wouldnt think of a
shop,a shopkeeper wouldnt think of hunting,a whiteman wouldnt think of
painting this way and a blackman wouldnt think of painting that way,hes not
any more inteligent just because he learns to wear cloths,people(a lot
anyway)who go to art college learn to paint and work a certain way and they
dont deviate far from this,some genius,if they were told first day they
could just paint rubbish if they wanted to then after a few years who knows
what they could be produced, i dont get the weirdy artisty vignette type
thingys either(seen one and you`ve seen em all)how this gained currency i`ll
never know,through the eyes of an artist and all that,fairs fair these
people talk themselves into this and expect the rest of us to fall over them
then,i`d love to hear the justification,this is me expressing myself,shur
thats just bollux,i recently saw a thing in a gallery here,there was a pair
of tights with a hole between the legs and the artist called this piece
rape,thats the artist how to be an artist logic working right there,an
origional thought,the get mad after the calm, says me
> (snipping where you lost me)
> :take this take that,its what sells,merit isnt an issue,there is a
> difference :between art and hack,what they`re taught in college is hack
not
> art
>
> What do you mean, give some examples please?
>
how is it something like mills and boon is considered hack and the brontes
or virginia wolfe(lesbian)is considered literature,
how to write a book in ten easy steps
step one:;blah blah
step two:blah blah
etc etc etc said me
> : and if little jimmy hendrix says pop to me i`ll break his neck,
>
> Sorry, but then I'll have to have Janis Joplin kick your arse!
>
and in walks james brown to punch her nose,hid andrew
> :i was to say hang up my stuff theres a chances i`d be told to go
away,said me
>
> There's not a chance, it is likely. But, you need to read Dan's post. You
> need to find the right gallery.
>
arts a vacation and not a proffession anyway,says me
> :(i wont be exhibition ready for another two or three years) it`d probably
> :social commentry(oop this bit)
>
> What makes you "uniquely qualified?" I am curious...
>
i `m horrified,i cant believe i said that,i was drunk i was mad,my left
legs hoping up and down,if i`d reread what i`d wrote it wouldnt have got
near,i could lie and say i was just trying to draw an arguement,take my word
for it when i say i will never make anither utterence like that again,i am
qualified though(a little bit)my experience is first hand and hasnt been got
through a crack in the curtains,i`ve spent the last 25 years standing
watching the road ,i`ll leave it at that because i can see the next half a
mile is going to be rubbish,lets just say i have a very simple view and my
eyes are honest,i`m just different,the spoon aint too bent,you dont get what
i see at all,,i need a drink,i`m gonna start crying ,the loss of
God,materialism,injustice,westernism,people getting stupider,etc etc.sobs me
> : but i know it will be jugded in terms of its picassoness,is picasso art
> :defined,is the potential we who hope to be artists should be seeing one
of
> :business and picasso,is that the goal and standard we should be hoping
:to
> achieve,said me
>
> Who is putting this stuff into your head? The people coming out of art
> schools today do work that looks nothing like Picasso.
>
the people coming out of art colledge today are exactly like picasso(or an
offshoot anyway,i think it fair to say that picassos contribution to art(and
possibly to world culture)was the notion of the useless aesthetic,this is
all that concerns artists today,its the sole concern of the majority of art
students(that and the business aspect)i`ve met,they dont concern themselves
with anything else because its non conjusive ,they dont question they
regurgitate,they come out thinking theyre james brown,ever try to argue with
one,you know it they know it but thats the way art works.theyre not
interested in the good of art,all they want to know is how to get into this
corner or into that corner,whatever it is there serving it aint the good of
art,you say to them"design me a kettle or paint me a landscape"the first
thing they do is reach for a bottle of picasso,if i rub the ointment on
right then it`ll pass as a work of art,paint me an abstract landscape you
say,kandinski this kandinski that,kandinski`s like picasso,picassos like
those italian fellas etc,they dont have an origional thought of there
own,you mix green by mixing blue and yellow,you paint a successful work by
mixing something picasso with something clever,its true i know its true,you
say pass me the rubber(eraser)and its a great big work ethical thing,the
work ethic has drowned out any concerns for what art actually is,theyve no
concerns for the integrety of art and integrety`s the word i`m looking
for,integrety?whats that?is it successful?is it anything like
picasso?picassos good,i like picasso,says andrew
,
> :has anybody got any ideas for hitting the arts council,asked andrew
>
>
> Ethnic or Millenium projects are hot right now. Community-based projects.
>
> its ok i`ve thought of something absoletly great and a sure fire winner,a
local publication with a nice big pile of bias,an absolutely sure fire
guaranteed winner,brilliance,cant miss,i`ll give the millenium a miss
though,the twentith centuary heh,that was a one that was,enjoy it while you
can it wont be here much longer,you never know you might be asked questions
on it later,lovely lovely twentith centuary,going going gone.says me
>
> You need to explain about football/soccer to the Americans too. (And some
of
> them aren't gay, ya know...)
>
everything you need to know about football,footballs a game and not a
sport(very important)love liverpool and hate man.utd.(money grabbing barely
wins,sport)viva football football crazy football mad football crazy football
mad etc,thats basically all there is to it,i could go on but i`d only end
out breaking something,
> name of any war artists(esp,ww2)please say,says me
>
>
> How about Alfred Quiroz for Vietnam war?
is he for or against the soldier ,because if hes against i aint int
Kay
andrew mc sweeney wrote:
(snipped part one)
:> Who is putting this stuff into your head? The people coming out of art
:> schools today do work that looks nothing like Picasso.
:the people coming out of art colledge today are exactly like picasso(or an
:offshoot anyway,i think it fair to say that picassos contribution to
art(and
:possibly to world culture)was the notion of the useless aesthetic,
What is a "useless aesthetic?"
this is
:all that concerns artists today,its the sole concern of the majority of art
:students(that and the business aspect)i`ve met,they dont concern themselves
:with anything else because its non conjusive ,they dont question they
:regurgitate,they come out thinking theyre james brown,ever try to argue
with
:one,you know it they know it but thats the way art works.theyre not
:interested in the good of art,all they want to know is how to get into this
:corner or into that corner,whatever it is there serving it aint the good of
:art,you say to them"design me a kettle or paint me a landscape"the first
:thing they do is reach for a bottle of picasso,if i rub the ointment on
:right then it`ll pass as a work of art,paint me an abstract landscape you
:say,kandinski this kandinski that,kandinski`s like picasso,
Kandinski is nothing like Picasso.
picassos like
:those italian fellas etc,
What Italian fellas? The Renaissance Italian fellas? Do you mean Futurism?
:they dont have an origional thought of there
:own,
Good grief, Andrew. Read their writings. Read their manifestos. You may not
agree with all, but *some* is bound to influence you!
you mix green by mixing blue and yellow,you paint a successful work by
:mixing something picasso with something clever,its true i know its true,you
:say pass me the rubber(eraser)and its a great big work ethical thing,the
:work ethic has drowned out any concerns for what art actually is,theyve no
:concerns for the integrety of art and integrety`s the word i`m looking
:for,integrety?whats that?is it successful?is it anything like
:picasso?picassos good,i like picasso,says andrew
Hmmm.
:> :has anybody got any ideas for hitting the arts council,asked andrew
:>
:>
:> Ethnic or Millenium projects are hot right now. Community-based projects.
:>
:> its ok i`ve thought of something absoletly great and a sure fire winner,a
:local publication with a nice big pile of bias,an absolutely sure fire
:guaranteed winner,brilliance,cant miss,i`ll give the millenium a miss
:though,the twentith centuary heh,that was a one that was,enjoy it while you
:can it wont be here much longer,you never know you might be asked questions
:on it later,lovely lovely twentith centuary,going going gone.says me
Twentieth century boggles the mind, doesn't it? Good luck on your
"absolutely sure fire guaranteed winner, brilliance" project.
:> name of any war artists(esp,ww2)please say,says me
:>
:> How about Alfred Quiroz for Vietnam war?
:
:is he for or against the soldier ,because if hes against i aint int
:
Satire.
Kay
Kay
> You are losing me here. (etc)So, sorry Andrew, you
> are wrong (and obsessed with Blackmen and Hommos)
Andrew responded:
i think your completely missing the point,its like the scene in monty pytons
life of brian where brian says consider the lilli and everybody picks him up
wrong.i was using this example (whiteman-native-jungle)because i thought to
make it clear as possible,same thing another way,you got gaugan and the
natives,you dont want the natives learning to paint like like gaugan,you
want them to keep painting the way they do and maybe go on from there, thats
better,and thats not what theyre doing in colleges,i aint obsessed with
blackmen and hommos,couldnt care less about about blackmen this blackmen
that,we`re all equal here and wishing different dont alter a thing, fairs
fair you cant be better than someone,thats just outside my comprehension
comrade.hommos turn my stomach though, it aint natural it aint right,its all
hysteric ,x and y chromosone my ass, how is it theres no gay elephants,or
gay birds,or crocadiles ,or gay rhinos, or fish,why is it man is the only
creature to have hommos,it wouldnt be so bad if they kept it to themselves
but they try and encourage it in others, and i wouldnt believe that liberal
misinformation on events either,
> Look at some art history books, mc sweeney. Did you look at the early
>works of Mondrian, van Gogh, Jackson Pollock. Their changes were >amazing
and they are famous (or infamous) but they, obviously did NOT >stay painting
a certain way and they DID deviate far from this.
they didnt deviate they progressed
>: ,i recently saw a thing in a gallery here,there was a pair
> :of tights with a hole between the legs and the artist called this piece
> :rape,thats the artist how to be an artist logic working right there,an
> :origional thought,the get mad after the calm, says me
> Conceptual art. Most often associated with "Emperor's New Clothes"
>comments. Too often it is shown for shock value. See if the artist is still
>showing after 10 years. Chris Burden comes to mind (performance >artist)
and he did really shocking stuff like being nailed to his Volkswagon >like
Christ but then, over time, his art evolved and while it remained
>conceptual, there was more to it than *shock* appeal.
conceptual arts shit,the problem with conceptual work is that you have to be
able to conceptualise it,i am a mushroom,you shouldnt have to owe a piece of
work,it should be able speak for itself,a curator i was talking to while at
college said a lot of what he decided he should put up depended on how much
he had to owe it,art is a concept is stupid,i get expression, and the
emperors new clothes,ever try to argue with an emperors new
cloths,contradict them and they say its you and your ignorence,yknow ,stop
the lights like,explain this work for me you say,blah blah clever,blah blah
intelligent,blah blah reach blah idea blah,its a concetual thing you wouldnt
get it,its just i`m sick of seeing this stuff,the expressionists are by far
superier an a lot purer and true to art,honestly,ask yourself just what is
art,be honest not clever,thats my opinion anyway,you aint thought to ask
that question in school,i`m half thinking of going back to a more
illustrationary frame of mind,we get i am a mushroom,a work should speak for
itself and not have you scraping for answers,we know what a mysterious and
magical and innaccessable type aesthetic type thing is,the important bit
being innacessable,do artists try and surround themselves with
innacessability,i donno but they seem to understand it,whats the story
rory,stardom?
> :how is it something like mills and boon is considered hack and the
>:brontes or virginia wolfe(lesbian)is considered literature,
> Virginia Woolf was bi-sexual and is dead so don't be afraid of her...
>Have you read any of these? You should read Virginia Woolf because >she
actually states the same thing you have been saying here (in her own >way).
You complain that you are expected to make art a certain way so it >will be
accepted and eventually sold. I guess that is what you mean by >"hacks". She
agreed. She stated that one had to create (write, paint, >etc.) as if there
was no audience, no potential buyer in order to not be >influenced and not
to be tempted to compromise the work and that to do >so would be
to"prostitute" the work and the artist.
100percent all the way ,i couldnt agree more
> It is funny that you are complaining about her because you write in much
>the same manner as she - kind of a stream of consciousness manner.
> :how to write a book in ten easy steps
> :step one:;blah blah
> :step two:blah blah
> :etc etc etc said me
> You haven't read her writings, have you?
i have one of her books somewhere if thats any good
> I have to break up the response into 2 parts because you don't leave any
> room. I enjoy reading your ramblings and they are interesting, but you
>have to quit being obsessed with the blackman, the jungles, the hommos,
>the lesbos or I'll have to ignore you and I'd hate to do that because I
have
>fun responding to your posts. Things may be very different where you are
>with the Catholic Church and the Pope and Bishops and Cardinals and >Mother
Theresa and Princess Diana and St. Patrick's Day and all that, >but here, it
is considered very stupid and uncouth to categorize people >like you are
doing so please, please - apologize and cut that shit out..
> Kay
i am a robot and i think what is liberally correct because thats the right
thing to think,i`ve have progressed beyond that,catholics think a lot,and
they think properely,hope and belief is a strong combination,protestants a
stupid religion anyway,its not even real,it was only born because someone
was unhappy with the sacrament of marriage and wanted to flah around
him,thats all,they`ve only a pretend and suppose God,"oh i suppose there
must be a God ,ontologically speaking that is",do protestants say
prayers,princess di is of no consequence to us whatsoever in any way shape
or form,dont knock paddy`s day at all because you dont get paddy and the
snake at all,how is it you defend hommos and attack the church,is this whats
running the country,i wont apolagise ,i`ve done nothing wrong,all i did was
state my honest opinions,everybody knows the liberals are stupid,its the
liberals that drive people up the wall not ordinary people,the liberals are
worse than any church,stupid and uncouth?better out than in,the worst thing
you can do is keep things in,thats asking for trouble,state your opinion and
everybody knows where everybody else is standing,i wasnt brought up to be a
liar and a liar i aint,you only get pains keeping things in,liars and
cheaters dont prosper,people dont like em because they do be uncertain about
their standing,are you black comrade,i dunno ,i`ve spent my say and i
apolagise for anything bad or distainful,my opinion about the hommos is the
opinion of about 98percent of the irish population, i am in the majoratyhere
(hommos queers ,jibbers,steamers, knobbers,faggots)having said that i can
seperate the man from the hommo, man one thing hommo another,i knew one a
while back and he was ok(when he wasnt hommosexual,when he forgot he was a
hommosexual,its all put on)i`ll drop the subject of the sexually bent but
someone else might bring it up and i`ll have to address that,i`m glad you
wrote me(really) i`ve only just thought,you refer to your coloured friends
as afro americans,you dont call them afro american to their face do ya,to
talk to someone as if theyre a presupposition is to call them stupid,
presupposition is patranisation(if your nice about it),you`d nearly be
better off calling them wogs or would that hurt their feelings,its all about
equality and you dont talk to someone presupositionally,you talk to people
in first
person,we`ve a coloured family living around the corner,they are irish first
and coloured if at all,when i see the youngfella i dont say to myself theres
a wog,i say(because he is)hes a good youngfella,well brought up,he knows
what decency is,the decency factor is all i need to know about someone
everything else is just incidental,its the need to know and its all i need
to know,i think youre being unfair,im glad you wrote me,i dunno was it meant
for post or for my letterbox,things work out ,yours in honesty ,andrew
p.s.if you like ethnic in art then check out the irish artists grace and
paul henry,also sean keating,it mightnt be your idea of ethnic art but it is
indiginous(they have had classical training so i do kinda get what your
saying,its just i have this super idea), i`ll respond to your post tomorrow
as i`m a bit tired,it`ll probably be a repeat of this,thanks if youre
american then i`m just saying the jerry springer shows good,ha ha american
art up until the turn of the centuary,we`ve little or no knowledge i might
be full of shit but at least its active(sticky out of the tongue,waaah)
andrew mc sweeney
mdeli <hug...@interlog.com> wrote in message
news:37872e77...@news.interlog.com...
> Modern Academic Abstraction has one valid claim, namely that it is
> something entirely different from the art of the past. It conforms to
> no classical standards (I use the term loosely here).
>
> Stylistically Modern Academic artwork considered the great art of this
> century, encompasses not only modern abstraction but also No Skill
> Realism (NSR). This is work which though critically considered modern
> art, contains instantly recognizable images.
>
> The best place to sample lots of ordinary sub-furniture store no skill
> realism is right here on the web. But this realism, even when
> accompanied by a hard hitting manifesto which hardly anyone reads,
> rarely has any real Modern Academic Art power.
>
> The Important NSR I am referring to here is praised as great art and
> hangs in museums near our acclaimed abstract masters because it
> presents them with no challenge.
>
> The main characteristics of NSR are abominable drawing and a strong
> dose of schmier (preferably impasto). This is termed by critics as
> anything from abstract distortion all the way to the fourth dimension,
> in many more words of course.
>
> Great art status for NSR started in this century with the works of
> classical Modern Academics from Matisse (the most important of the
> lot) and Picasso and advanced through the worst of Expressionism and
> on to our presently fashionable big canvas realist potzers like
> Hockney and Rivers etc.
>
> This alone shows that we are not in a century of pure abstraction.
> Even the claims of de Kooning experts attest to this. No one could say
> that his Keane like goo-goo eyes and occasional naughty parts aren't
> recognizable.
>
> Most people are not offended by pure abstraction in the visual sense.
> Mondrian, Kandinski, Pollock, Rothko etc. certainly have a graphic
> attraction equal to that of nice towels. By comparison the master
> works of NSR are more often than not, no sight for sore eyes.
>
> After many years of flat Greenbergian asceticism, NSR is again OK in
> critical eyes. This, as long as it contains lots of drawing errors,
> remains mindlessly simplistic, doesn't tell any stories (lest it be
> labeled illustration) and has an abstract section (a few obvious flat
> schmiers). Oh yes it has to come in mega-sizes so that the pretense of
> importance equals any nearby abstraction and the artists' incompetence
> is made instantly apparent.
>
> .If it doesn't look like a put-on it won't make it as great modern
> art.
>
brilliant says andrew
andrew mc sweeney
andrew mc sweeney
>
> andrew mc sweeney wrote:
> (snipped part one)
>
> :> schools today do work that looks nothing like Picasso.
>
> :the people coming out of art colledge today are exactly like picasso(or
an
> :offshoot anyway,i think it fair to say that picassos contribution to
> art(and
>
> What is a "useless aesthetic?"
well it is,says me
> :right then it`ll pass as a work of art,paint me an abstract landscape you
> :say,kandinski this kandinski that,kandinski`s like picasso,
>
> Kandinski is nothing like Picasso.
>
my point exactly,says
> picassos like
> :those italian fellas etc,
>
Futurism,says
>
> Good grief, Andrew. Read their writings. Read their manifestos. You may
not
> agree with all, but *some* is bound to influence you!
>
van goghs the man,says me
> you mix green by mixing blue and yellow,you paint a successful work by
> :mixing something picasso with something clever,its true i know its
true,you
> :say pass me the rubber(eraser)and its a great big work ethical thing,the
> :work ethic has drowned out any concerns for what art actually is,theyve
no
> :concerns for the integrety of art and integrety`s the word i`m looking
> :for,integrety?whats that?is it successful?is it anything like
> :picasso?picassos good,i like picasso,says andrew
>
>
> Hmmm.
we get andy warhol,thats it like,a preoccupation with andy warhol,maybe i
should have said him instead of picasso,process this process that,whats the
difference between hg wells and a modern science fiction writer,ones
processed the other isnt,and thats what i`m talking about,you go to
college,your processed and come out a little andy warhol,it aint the
colleges fault ,its the students preoccupation with being able to paint like
an artist,they`re more interested in the processes than they are with arts
welfare,i dunno how the myth came to be,hows the winter,still as
inaccessable as ever,any film noir lately(saw the noir,ever see a gay doing
a noir film,weird,very,and unpleasant,and disgusting,and wrong,saw the film
the crow)its all shit,i dunt get this innacessability thing at all,whats
innacessability got to do with art,all i know is they`re all buying it,and
studing it and not bothering with anything else because it isnt mysterious
or magical enough,the thing is you`ll have these self same foolahs telling
you(and the whole wide world)whats what,further perpetuating things,,i
dunno,processed art,processed artists,do androids dream of electric sheep,do
sheep dream of organic androids,thats all,says me
andrew
andrew mc sweeney
<rdav...@my-deja.com> wrote in message news:7mjl2v$4c7$1...@nnrp1.deja.com...
> In article <7mivht$euq$1...@scotty.tinet.ie>,
> "andrew mc sweeney" <mack...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > Andrew's style of posting is a deliberate affectation
> >
> > no answer to that really,says me,
> > whats the correct way i should have said that,affectionally
> speaking,says me
> >
>
Iian Neill
> thentrythisonforsizeandseehowmuchyourecognize
> andthereatlastitwasnomorerealismnomorerepresentationalobjectsno
> morelinescolorsformsandcontoursnomorepigmentsnomore
> brushstrokesnomoreevocationsnomoreframeswallsgalleries museumsno
> moregnawingatthetorturedfaceofthegodflatnessno more
> audiencerequiredjustareceiverthatmayormaynotbeapersonormayor
> maynotbethereatallnomoreegoprojectedjustthe
> artistinthethirdpersonwhomaybeanyoneornooneatallfornothingis
> demandedofhimnothingatallnotevenexistenceforthatgotlostinthe
> subjunctivemodeandinthatmomentofabsolutelydispassionate
> abdicationofinsouciantwitheringawayartmadeitsfinalflightclimbed
> higherandhigherinaneverdecreasingtighterturningspiraluntilwithone
> lastergoffreedomonelastdendriticsynapseitdisappearedupitsown
> fundamentalapertureandcameouttheothersideasarttheoryarttheory
> pureandsimplewordsonapageliteratureundefiledbyvisionflatflatter
> flattestavisioninvisibleevenineffableasineffableastheangelsandthe
> universalsoulsfromtomwolfespaintedword
I am sorry, I can't find this word in the dictionary.
Regards,
Iian Neill