View Edward G. Nilges' art at Image Station
Edward G. Nilges
author of the Apress book Build Your Own .Net Language and Compiler
but in some ways I am still a recovering art student, therefore these
two weeks I am tramping about Paris and Provence on vacation from a
position in China while drawing from life and from sculpture.
If you like go to the site at
http://www.imagestation.com/album/index.html?id=3176440093 to view my
artistic output and comment. Note that I shall be adding to this site
over the week to come.
My theme, like that of the redoubtable and talented Nerd Gerl, my
¨¨evil henchwoman¨¨, mon Muse, is the angelic self-possession of the
body in an era of commodification and discipline, so there: take that,
you swine.
The tears of the Philistine remain the nectar of the gods, and in the
gallery of Cezannes across the river from the Louvre I rediscover just
how WRONG Mani Deli is about Cezanne.
La Maison du Pendu (http://images.google.fr/images?q=la+maison+du+pendu&hl=fr&btnG=Recherche+Google)
is nothing like any of its reproductions. It is a PRESENCE, a sonority
of color and form. One is compelled to use a form of language mocked
by a corrupted people who are also gulls and fools for political lies,
for the same reason they pass by the record of labor uncomprehending.
Cezanne needed to work in a society which like the USA today
fantasizes that the better people don't work. Instead then and now,
the ¨¨successful¨¨ man was and is too self-identical to do much of
anything except bullyrag headwaiters and transform responsible
statesmanship, such as that of Gore or Kerry in debate to an ironic,
flip, nihilistic and ignorant remark.
Electric Nachos
Edward G. Nilges wrote in message ...
>Edward G. Nilges c'est moi and I write this week from Paris. I am the
>author of the Apress book Build Your Own .Net Language and Compiler
>but in some ways I am still a recovering art student, therefore these
>two weeks I am tramping about Paris and Provence on vacation from a
>position in China while drawing from life and from sculpture.
>
>If you like go to the site at
>http://www.imagestation.com/album/index.html?id=3176440093 to view my
>artistic output and comment. Note that I shall be adding to this site
>over the week to come.
Wow Edward - they have a nice intellectual feel!
>My theme, like that of the redoubtable and talented Nerd Gerl, my
>¨¨evil henchwoman¨¨, mon Muse, is the angelic self-possession of the
>body in an era of commodification and discipline, so there: take that,
>you swine.
Aw, Eddie! <batting eyes> I'd fight crime with you anytime. :-)
>The tears of the Philistine remain the nectar of the gods, and in the
>gallery of Cezannes across the river from the Louvre I rediscover just
>how WRONG Mani Deli is about Cezanne.
>
>La Maison du Pendu
(http://images.google.fr/images?q=la+maison+du+pendu&hl=fr&btnG=Recherche+Go
ogle)
>is nothing like any of its reproductions. It is a PRESENCE, a sonority
>of color and form. One is compelled to use a form of language mocked
>by a corrupted people who are also gulls and fools for political lies,
>for the same reason they pass by the record of labor uncomprehending.
Not fair - I "cont stond" Cezanne. But - I am no proponent of Hasbro's Game
of Life (Reality TV, U.S. Version) either!
>Cezanne needed to work in a society which like the USA today
>fantasizes that the better people don't work. Instead then and now,
>the ¨¨successful¨¨ man was and is too self-identical to do much of
>anything except bullyrag headwaiters and transform responsible
>statesmanship, such as that of Gore or Kerry in debate to an ironic,
>flip, nihilistic and ignorant remark.
I say we revolt against this god-forsaken feudal system and fight the
power... whadda ya say!
Edward G. Nilges
> Edward G. Nilges wrote in message ...
> >Edward G. Nilges c'est moi and I write this week from Paris. I am the
> >author of the Apress book Build Your Own .Net Language and Compiler
> >but in some ways I am still a recovering art student, therefore these
> >two weeks I am tramping about Paris and Provence on vacation from a
> >position in China while drawing from life and from sculpture.
> >
> >If you like go to the site at
> >http://www.imagestation.com/album/index.html?id=3176440093 to view my
> >artistic output and comment. Note that I shall be adding to this site
> >over the week to come.
>
> Wow Edward - they have a nice intellectual feel!
Thanks: but one needs to access emotion which is my task
>
> >My theme, like that of the redoubtable and talented Nerd Gerl, my
> >¨¨evil henchwoman¨¨, mon Muse, is the angelic self-possession of the
> >body in an era of commodification and discipline, so there: take that,
> >you swine.
>
> Aw, Eddie! <batting eyes> I'd fight crime with you anytime. :-)
Vous yeux! You eyes! C'est etoiles de la nuit!
>
> >The tears of the Philistine remain the nectar of the gods, and in the
> >gallery of Cezannes across the river from the Louvre I rediscover just
> >how WRONG Mani Deli is about Cezanne.
> >
> >La Maison du Pendu
> (http://images.google.fr/images?q=la+maison+du+pendu&hl=fr&btnG=Recherche+Go
> ogle)
> >is nothing like any of its reproductions. It is a PRESENCE, a sonority
> >of color and form. One is compelled to use a form of language mocked
> >by a corrupted people who are also gulls and fools for political lies,
> >for the same reason they pass by the record of labor uncomprehending.
>
> Not fair - I "cont stond" Cezanne. But - I am no proponent of Hasbro's Game
> of Life (Reality TV, U.S. Version) either!
I will take you to Chicago and Paris and we shall stand before
Cezanne, for in repro his genius does not fully appear
>
> >Cezanne needed to work in a society which like the USA today
> >fantasizes that the better people don't work. Instead then and now,
> >the ¨¨successful¨¨ man was and is too self-identical to do much of
> >anything except bullyrag headwaiters and transform responsible
> >statesmanship, such as that of Gore or Kerry in debate to an ironic,
> >flip, nihilistic and ignorant remark.
>
> I say we revolt against this god-forsaken feudal system and fight the
> power... whadda ya say!
Yes! Oui! D'accord!
Electric Nachos
Edward G. Nilges wrote in message ...
>"Electric Nachos" <aint_...@chew.foo> wrote in message
news:<10mg7db...@corp.supernews.com>...
>
>> >http://www.imagestation.com/album/index.html?id=3176440093 to view my
>> >artistic output and comment. Note that I shall be adding to this site
>> >over the week to come.
>>
>> Wow Edward - they have a nice intellectual feel!
>
>Thanks: but one needs to access emotion which is my task
I am not very good at that. Enseignez-moi, svp Monsieur.
>Vous yeux! You eyes! C'est etoiles de la nuit!
Ils brilleront dans toute l'éternité pour vous. (Kinda funny - there's
French instrumentation on the radio now - accompanying Spanish lyrics! Lol)
>I will take you to Chicago and Paris and we shall stand before
>Cezanne, for in repro his genius does not fully appear
How do you teach a nit-picking perfectionist to revalue Cezanne??? You are
asking me to accept flaws... <shudder the thought> Lol
You are pointing to a road that I may not be mature enough to travel. Not I,
nor many.
Edward G. Nilges
> Edward G. Nilges wrote in message ...
> >"Electric Nachos" <aint_...@chew.foo> wrote in message
> news:<10mg7db...@corp.supernews.com>...
> >
> >> >If you like go to the site at
> >> >http://www.imagestation.com/album/index.html?id=3176440093 to view my
> >> >artistic output and comment. Note that I shall be adding to this site
> >> >over the week to come.
> >>
> >> Wow Edward - they have a nice intellectual feel!
> >
> >Thanks: but one needs to access emotion which is my task
>
> I am not very good at that. Enseignez-moi, svp Monsieur.
Par example, in mon dessin d l'Orfee, I realize that despite Orfeo's
genius, his genius plays only a small part, allowing his passage
through the spirits d l'Enfer. His marriage and his death take center
stage.
>
> >Vous yeux! You eyes! C'est etoiles de la nuit!
>
> Ils brilleront dans toute l'éternité pour vous. (Kinda funny - there's
> French instrumentation on the radio now - accompanying Spanish lyrics! Lol)
Vous rire et chantant, et, in the old way of speaking in these lands,
vous risez et chantez.
>
> >I will take you to Chicago and Paris and we shall stand before
> >Cezanne, for in repro his genius does not fully appear
>
> How do you teach a nit-picking perfectionist to revalue Cezanne??? You are
> asking me to accept flaws... <shudder the thought> Lol
>
The good is the enemy of the best, Madame. The problematic of
Cezanne's genius was that it was large enough to encompass all of
Provence and thereby all of the connection between Gaul and Rome. As
such and looking before and after it surveyed the minute photographic
realism of Paris and found it insufficient to its theme.
Lao T'se would say, forget skill, forget good drawing, forget craft,
and skill, good drawing and craft will return.
Electric Nachos
Edward G. Nilges wrote in message ...
>"Electric Nachos" <aint_...@chew.foo> wrote in message
news:<10mkb99...@corp.supernews.com>...
>> Edward G. Nilges wrote in message ...
>> >"Electric Nachos" <aint_...@chew.foo> wrote in message
>> news:<10mg7db...@corp.supernews.com>...
>> >
>> >> >If you like go to the site at
>> >> >http://www.imagestation.com/album/index.html?id=3176440093 to view my
>> >> >artistic output and comment. Note that I shall be adding to this site
>> >> >over the week to come.
>> >>
>> >> Wow Edward - they have a nice intellectual feel!
>> >
>> >Thanks: but one needs to access emotion which is my task
>>
>> I am not very good at that. Enseignez-moi, svp Monsieur.
>
>Par example, in mon dessin d l'Orfee, I realize that despite Orfeo's
>genius, his genius plays only a small part, allowing his passage
>through the spirits d l'Enfer. His marriage and his death take center
>stage.
Ugh! That requires "thinking." Lol
There are *so* many layers upon layers upon layers of "ideas" to investigate
in art - be it visual, literal, musical, theater, etc. Appreciating these
communications must truly be an "art" in itself - and require the thinking
of a master. A master can look -beyond- the obvious, and see true
motivations. I am prone to "read" only the 1st layer - take things at face
value. This should explain my inability to connect - and the inability of
others (who won't admit it). I like this dialog. We speak to each other -
yet explain to all.... here.... upon mount wanna.hock.a.loogie. <g>
>Vous rire et chantant, et, in the old way of speaking in these lands,
>vous risez et chantez.
Pour vous? OUI!
>The good is the enemy of the best, Madame. The problematic of
>Cezanne's genius was that it was large enough to encompass all of
>Provence and thereby all of the connection between Gaul and Rome. As
>such and looking before and after it surveyed the minute photographic
>realism of Paris and found it insufficient to its theme.
Hmm... I will reply by saying Cezanne went far beyond photographic
resistance - to the point of distortion - imo, a mockery of nature - disdain
for physical coordination, etc. etc.. Can you declare (and clarify) that the
guy *purposely* painted the way he did?
>Lao T'se would say, forget skill, forget good drawing, forget craft,
>and skill, good drawing and craft will return.
"Return" - meaning that it existed in the beginning! ;-)
Edward G. Nilges
We survey like vampire bride and groom tout le Paris.
>
> >Vous rire et chantant, et, in the old way of speaking in these lands,
> >vous risez et chantez.
>
> Pour vous? OUI!
>
> >The good is the enemy of the best, Madame. The problematic of
> >Cezanne's genius was that it was large enough to encompass all of
> >Provence and thereby all of the connection between Gaul and Rome. As
> >such and looking before and after it surveyed the minute photographic
> >realism of Paris and found it insufficient to its theme.
>
> Hmm... I will reply by saying Cezanne went far beyond photographic
> resistance - to the point of distortion - imo, a mockery of nature - disdain
> for physical coordination, etc. etc.. Can you declare (and clarify) that the
> guy *purposely* painted the way he did?
Madame, cherie, the detail of the pattern is movement as in the figure
of the ten stairs. Today, I ran up to the site of the former citadel
of Nice, and it was as if I moved through one million separate
postcards.
My view honey bucket is one I learned from painting itself, which is
that a small shift produces a new view.
Cezanne was trying to summarize not only image but movement, and in a
pre-scientific and post-scientific way in which the emotions we feel
in a landscape are not compartmentalized, indeed not encountered with
the rather judgemental if not marginalizing name "emotion".
Cezanne, a bit of a throwback in the Second Empire, experienced not
the Provence that is experienced let us say by an American tourist who
when he arrives did not know that there is a place called Provence and
it is in France.
The tourist qui arrvive then either gets smashed or else if
German-American learns what he thinks is everything about Provence but
just the facts.
Cezanne seems to have experienced Provence not only sensuously,
primarily through massive sexual frustration sublimated into the
indisciplined energy of a sacred monster for whom there would have
been room in Napoleon's Grand Army but for whom there was no room in
the lying salons of the Second Empire, but also intellectually
courtesy of a halfway decent education (certainly far more than any
American) in the classics and indeed the connection, which runs
through Provence, between Rome and Gaul.
As such and because all art is graffitti, destructive to some extent
simply by occupying our attention in place of things "more worthy"
(whatever they might be such as paying the rent), Cezanne had every
right to splatter his brains all over canvas and because pure color
(as in Matisse) is boring decoration and pure form (as in my
Spartacus) is depressing I like it and there's an end.
Furthermore, he and Poussin, who like Cezanne was not a "natural"
draftsman, have taught art students how to block out generalized
figures as a start to correct proportion.
>
> >Lao T'se would say, forget skill, forget good drawing, forget craft,
> >and skill, good drawing and craft will return.
>
> "Return" - meaning that it existed in the beginning! ;-)
It may have.
At the end of the last Ice Age, the glaciers seemed for an epoch to
have ended somewhere in Paris, perhaps in the 10me Arondissement.
The waters flowing off the glaciers created verdant and springlike
valleys to the south and many peoples gathered there (I read) to
basically sit around, drink wine, trade stuff and conduct fart and
booger contests. For this was in the Age of Gold before agriculture
and before McDonalds when modern scholarship reports that in temperate
climes and Africa, one had to work only two hours a day.
In the right spot, a couple of the guys would get up in the morning,
go out to valleys filled with prancing elk and bison, whack an elk or
bison over the head and be back home by 10 AM. The children would have
been gathering berries and the women tending the fire and by 1 PM
everyone would have been squiffled and ready to eat, and so, in the
best spots, it continued for thousands of years. There may have been
language but there could not have been historical consciousness, at
least that which originates in suffering.
And, some of their number painted bison in caves with that "skill"
with which tout le monde here in rec.arts.fine seemed to be obsessed.
Fortunately and because years ago I listened to my Mom and got into
software because she wasn't about to have me lay about the house, I
have a career which makes some money most of the time.
Therefore I am free of my old anxiety that I was indeed "Cezanne", a
large, sexually frustrated and incompetent lout speaking a funny
Provencal accent, permanently destroyed by the Catholic-provincial
spirit of France, indeed in my case the very last casualty of an
old-time Catholic education, including Latin and the Mass in Latin.
Fortunately Mel Gibson seems to be instead of me.
I can just amuse myself and follow as did Cezanne mon recherches in
the Louvre, and indeed as a sketcher I am far less disruptive than the
tourists, mostly I am sad to report from Japan, qui descende and snap
photos without letup. I do note that the Chinese tourists listen
instead to docents and I recommend their scholarship to my Japanese
friends.
But we all make images, don't we. And unlike the case of Lescaux our
capability for reproduction has made our images a second nature, like
pebbles on the beach. But in a paradox it would take a Marxist to
appreciate, our attention span, complementary and in an internal
relationship to the image, reduces and no one image has any power, not
even mine sad to say.
I am enchanted as always to hear from you again.
Electric Nachos
>
>> resistance - to the point of distortion - imo, a mockery of nature -
disdain
>> for physical coordination, etc. etc.. Can you declare (and clarify) that
the
>> guy *purposely* painted the way he did?
>
>Madame, cherie, the detail of the pattern is movement as in the figure
>of the ten stairs. Today, I ran up to the site of the former citadel
>of Nice, and it was as if I moved through one million separate
>postcards.
Good Lord - What a visual! How you "got" there is a mystery to me!!
>My view honey bucket is one I learned from painting itself, which is
>that a small shift produces a new view.
Agreed 100%. 2 things:
(1) Realists resist these new views.
a) I wonder: Are they comfortable with this resistance (as an artist
responsible for bringing new views into the world)?
b) How can they justifyably discount art that expresses these views -
when they are exposed to them through their own act of art-making? Almost a
hyprocrisy, is it not?
(2) How much shift is acceptable? Any shift from the norm is a risky move -
risky in that it loses its ability to communicate anything to the viewer -
OR - there's the risk of communicating the opposite of what the artist
intended.
I can appreciate *consistent* shifts - one shift per painting, please... but
when a painting contains 3 or a zillion shifts - I am lost - as the painting
has no clear direction to lead me to its message.
Let's take a scenic picture painted with squiggly lines (like Matilla
pointed to a while back). IF the painting was titled something like,
"Through Teary Eyes," I would have understood the what the painting was
about. Unfortunately, artists rarely offer such clues, and most people like
me are stuck - trying to figure out why an artist would paint squigglies.
And yes - we would begin to form theories about a nervous hand, or living in
an earthquake-ridden country, or God knows what else.
>Cezanne was trying to summarize not only image but movement, and in a
>pre-scientific and post-scientific way in which the emotions we feel
>in a landscape are not compartmentalized, indeed not encountered with
>the rather judgemental if not marginalizing name "emotion".
Not an easy thing for the technically oriented to do... One one hand -
society is told to disregard emotion and deal with facts. On the other hand,
we are told to stand in another person's shoes and feel an experience. It's
just not easy to do one or the other - when one has been raised to operate
in a specific way. Kinda like asking a ballet dancer to think like a
forklift driver!
But none of that means this shift in thinking shouldn't be tried... however,
I believe the burden and responsibility of EASING this shift should be
placed onto the artist (as in my "Through Teary Eyes" example). Otherwise,
as time and history have proven, the work will never be appreciated (by the
masses) the way the artist intended.
>Cezanne, a bit of a throwback in the Second Empire, experienced not
>the Provence that is experienced let us say by an American tourist who
>when he arrives did not know that there is a place called Provence and
>it is in France. The tourist qui arrvive then either gets smashed or else
if
>German-American learns what he thinks is everything about Provence but
>just the facts.
>
>Cezanne seems to have experienced Provence not only sensuously,
>primarily through massive sexual frustration sublimated into the
>indisciplined energy of a sacred monster for whom there would have
>been room in Napoleon's Grand Army but for whom there was no room in
>the lying salons of the Second Empire, but also intellectually
>courtesy of a halfway decent education (certainly far more than any
>American) in the classics and indeed the connection, which runs
>through Provence, between Rome and Gaul.
>
>As such and because all art is graffitti, destructive to some extent
>simply by occupying our attention in place of things "more worthy"
>(whatever they might be such as paying the rent), Cezanne had every
>right to splatter his brains all over canvas and because pure color
>(as in Matisse) is boring decoration and pure form (as in my
>Spartacus) is depressing I like it and there's an end.
??? You're not suggesting that you like depressing expression, are you? If
so, why?!
>Furthermore, he and Poussin, who like Cezanne was not a "natural"
>draftsman, have taught art students how to block out generalized
>figures as a start to correct proportion.
Everyone does that - whether they admit it or not.
Yes - there most certainly IS a freedom to experience when the CHANCE is
taken! After years and years and years of being told "how to appreciate this
and that," I nearly flipped out when Matilla suggested I have the *right* to
view artwork any way I wanted to - as if I were a fish, at that!!
>Fortunately Mel Gibson seems to be instead of me.
>
>I can just amuse myself and follow as did Cezanne mon recherches in
>the Louvre, and indeed as a sketcher I am far less disruptive than the
>tourists, mostly I am sad to report from Japan, qui descende and snap
>photos without letup. I do note that the Chinese tourists listen
>instead to docents and I recommend their scholarship to my Japanese
>friends.
>
>But we all make images, don't we. And unlike the case of Lescaux our
>capability for reproduction has made our images a second nature, like
>pebbles on the beach. But in a paradox it would take a Marxist to
>appreciate, our attention span, complementary and in an internal
>relationship to the image, reduces and no one image has any power, not
>even mine sad to say.
>
>I am enchanted as always to hear from you again.
Well, I tried my best to keep up with you on this one. LoL
Edward G. Nilges
Cherie bucket, I do not ignore you as did Orpheus, Euridice, but
Internet cafes in France are expensive and one breaks les fingres on
the keyboard unfamiliar.
Please therefore allow me au pense about whatyoo lay down and reply en
le bonne temps
Edward G. Nilges
> Edward G. Nilges wrote in message ...
> >
> >> Hmm... I will reply by saying Cezanne went far beyond photographic
> >> resistance - to the point of distortion - imo, a mockery of nature -
> disdain
> >> for physical coordination, etc. etc.. Can you declare (and clarify) that
> the
> >> guy *purposely* painted the way he did?
> >
> >Madame, cherie, the detail of the pattern is movement as in the figure
> >of the ten stairs. Today, I ran up to the site of the former citadel
> >of Nice, and it was as if I moved through one million separate
> >postcards.
>
> Good Lord - What a visual! How you "got" there is a mystery to me!!
I took the second class overnight train. I had a bed all too myself
(unfortunately) in a chamber with five slumbering French people.
>
> >My view honey bucket is one I learned from painting itself, which is
> >that a small shift produces a new view.
>
> Agreed 100%. 2 things:
>
> (1) Realists resist these new views.
> a) I wonder: Are they comfortable with this resistance (as an artist
> responsible for bringing new views into the world)?
Perhaps Adorno was right. A work of art is a call to "reality" to
change and as such it questions, as realistic art, G-d's "art". It is
impious to this extent in the sense of iconoclastic religion including
Islam.
> b) How can they justifyably discount art that expresses these views -
> when they are exposed to them through their own act of art-making? Almost a
> hyprocrisy, is it not?
Oui. Art is where we get to run rampant without a committment to truth
so as to meet Truth on the road.
>
> (2) How much shift is acceptable? Any shift from the norm is a risky move -
> risky in that it loses its ability to communicate anything to the viewer -
> OR - there's the risk of communicating the opposite of what the artist
> intended.
>
I shall post soon my versions of a rather boring and academic
sculpture, Elles Aurient, of Jehan La Pucelle (Joan of Arc), for I
think the artist totally failed to understand in context that a
plaster saint like La Pucelle was originally a royal pain in the ass,
both for her Mom and for the louts of the village who wanted to marry
her.
Indeed, the idea that photographic art is "realistic" at all is just
silly when I gots DVDS with motion and sound, and the idea that the
DVDs are "realistic" is silly in turn once I can get a hologram let us
say of Elle MacPherson on whom to work my wicked will.
But before that time, I realize of course that the entire realistic
urge is a sidetrack. I wanted to create a new creation, sorta like the
old creation only to realize by looking that the original creation is
perfect.
American woman she say you're perfect now must change, get bikini wax
ouch. That's like the artist's dialectic. He is floored by the light
and must make a painting in which he changes the light.
> I can appreciate *consistent* shifts - one shift per painting, please... but
> when a painting contains 3 or a zillion shifts - I am lost - as the painting
> has no clear direction to lead me to its message.
>
I do not want to deal in clear directions I have no place to lead you
to except down by the riverside where the catfish play.
> Let's take a scenic picture painted with squiggly lines (like Matilla
> pointed to a while back). IF the painting was titled something like,
> "Through Teary Eyes," I would have understood the what the painting was
> about. Unfortunately, artists rarely offer such clues, and most people like
> me are stuck - trying to figure out why an artist would paint squigglies.
> And yes - we would begin to form theories about a nervous hand, or living in
> an earthquake-ridden country, or God knows what else.
>
Our first duty, love, is just to go to the museum and look and then
visit the shop and then have coffee, not to renarrate the experience.
> >Cezanne was trying to summarize not only image but movement, and in a
> >pre-scientific and post-scientific way in which the emotions we feel
> >in a landscape are not compartmentalized, indeed not encountered with
> >the rather judgemental if not marginalizing name "emotion".
>
> Not an easy thing for the technically oriented to do... One one hand -
> society is told to disregard emotion and deal with facts. On the other hand,
> we are told to stand in another person's shoes and feel an experience. It's
> just not easy to do one or the other - when one has been raised to operate
> in a specific way. Kinda like asking a ballet dancer to think like a
> forklift driver!
Or vice versa. Actually, Al Serpico was a New York City cop who took
ballet lessons in order to more gracefully apprehend germs, gemokes
and other suspects. He then blew the whistle on police corruption
since to study ballet (I even tried it meself) is to learn something
about Truth.
If the ballet master says ya gotta assume the position, ya gotta
assume the position. You can't explain to him that you really are in
the position mentally, or that everybody takes these payoffs.
Yet in ballet is no mimesis, darlin, is no representation. Hey lookit
me Ma I am a Swine in Swine Lake. No, it's just executing motions and
assuming positions that are excruciatingly difficult to do, sort of
like living in Queens on what they pay patrolmen.
Jackson Pollock's paintings were the record of what a guy does who
probably got plastered the night before. And, as a guy who has been
known to get plastered the night before, I am interested in what the
man did to make it to noon.
>
> But none of that means this shift in thinking shouldn't be tried... however,
> I believe the burden and responsibility of EASING this shift should be
> placed onto the artist (as in my "Through Teary Eyes" example). Otherwise,
> as time and history have proven, the work will never be appreciated (by the
> masses) the way the artist intended.
Ah, but we know EXACTLY what Cezanne was after: a Salon painting that
would reconcile form and color, which had been divided and placed at
war by the invention of photography.
His paintings "speak" to us as to the cave paintings.
Even our friend Mani Deli knows that Cezanne's figures are supposed to
be women. I mean, how do he know?
The cumbersome laboring after has its own beauty. It is a male beauty,
that in other words of the hairy Satyr in need of a bikini wax who is
ever pursuing.
I say one has to visit Provence to understand. Americans don't
understand just how powerful sublimation is. Cezanne's sexual
frustration is something they don't know. They get all their sexual
frustration AFTER sex whereas in my strict upbringing it was placed
BEFORE.
We had dessert in the 1960s and now are working on the veggies.
>
> >Cezanne, a bit of a throwback in the Second Empire, experienced not
> >the Provence that is experienced let us say by an American tourist who
> >when he arrives did not know that there is a place called Provence and
> >it is in France. The tourist qui arrvive then either gets smashed or else
> if
> >German-American learns what he thinks is everything about Provence but
> >just the facts.
> >
> >Cezanne seems to have experienced Provence not only sensuously,
> >primarily through massive sexual frustration sublimated into the
> >indisciplined energy of a sacred monster for whom there would have
> >been room in Napoleon's Grand Army but for whom there was no room in
> >the lying salons of the Second Empire, but also intellectually
> >courtesy of a halfway decent education (certainly far more than any
> >American) in the classics and indeed the connection, which runs
> >through Provence, between Rome and Gaul.
> >
> >As such and because all art is graffitti, destructive to some extent
> >simply by occupying our attention in place of things "more worthy"
> >(whatever they might be such as paying the rent), Cezanne had every
> >right to splatter his brains all over canvas and because pure color
> >(as in Matisse) is boring decoration and pure form (as in my
> >Spartacus) is depressing I like it and there's an end.
>
> ??? You're not suggesting that you like depressing expression, are you? If
> so, why?!
>
Sure, let's all get depressed and think about Spartacus. It's French
and a prelude to the sun.
I realized in France why the French are all so thin and good-looking.
It's because they don't eat in inappropriate times or places.
> >Furthermore, he and Poussin, who like Cezanne was not a "natural"
> >draftsman, have taught art students how to block out generalized
> >figures as a start to correct proportion.
>
> Everyone does that - whether they admit it or not.
>
At the Art Institute they made us draw pure contour without
preliminary blocking out. It was a pain.
Yes, you do.
> >Fortunately Mel Gibson seems to be instead of me.
> >
> >I can just amuse myself and follow as did Cezanne mon recherches in
> >the Louvre, and indeed as a sketcher I am far less disruptive than the
> >tourists, mostly I am sad to report from Japan, qui descende and snap
> >photos without letup. I do note that the Chinese tourists listen
> >instead to docents and I recommend their scholarship to my Japanese
> >friends.
> >
> >But we all make images, don't we. And unlike the case of Lescaux our
> >capability for reproduction has made our images a second nature, like
> >pebbles on the beach. But in a paradox it would take a Marxist to
> >appreciate, our attention span, complementary and in an internal
> >relationship to the image, reduces and no one image has any power, not
> >even mine sad to say.
> >
> >I am enchanted as always to hear from you again.
>
> Well, I tried my best to keep up with you on this one. LoL
That's why I went to France. My infelicitous French makes me easier to
understand since I know no subjunctive mood, no possibility, only me
hungry eatum up thank you mercy.
No shades of meaning, only blocks of sunlight.
France would be a great place to be married in, like Bob Crumb. Much
would I think depend on dinner.
Of course, to reconcile themselves to fixed mealtimes, the French make
a great fuss about wine, whereas I sorta kinda need to get back to the
space of just sitting-down-to, bless us o Lord for these thy gifts. I
long ago ceased to be an oenophile. It were a phase. Today, the only
sorta wine I'd be interested in would be Night Train.
Electric Nachos
Edward G. Nilges wrote in message ...
>> b) How can they justifyably discount art that expresses these
views -
>> when they are exposed to them through their own act of art-making? Almost
a
>> hyprocrisy, is it not?
>
>Oui. Art is where we get to run rampant without a committment to truth
>so as to meet Truth on the road.
I see two truths in this case: (1) visionary objectivism and (2) mental
tendency. Latter being the inclination to *think* a multitude of "what if's"
while making art - the former, resisting the latter.
>Indeed, the idea that photographic art is "realistic" at all is just
>silly when I gots DVDS with motion and sound, and the idea that the
>DVDs are "realistic" is silly in turn once I can get a hologram let us
>say of Elle MacPherson on whom to work my wicked will.
But DVDs and holograms are dynamic expressions of multimedia. Paintings,
drawings, and sculpture are static expressions of plain 'ol media. Apples
and oranges. Both are fruit - but alas, different from each other.
>I do not want to deal in clear directions I have no place to lead you
>to except down by the riverside where the catfish play.
I like that.
>Our first duty, love, is just to go to the museum and look and then
>visit the shop and then have coffee, not to renarrate the experience.
:-P
>Ah, but we know EXACTLY what Cezanne was after: a Salon painting that
>would reconcile form and color, which had been divided and placed at
>war by the invention of photography.
Ok... if you say so!
>His paintings "speak" to us as to the cave paintings.
>
>Even our friend Mani Deli knows that Cezanne's figures are supposed to
>be women. I mean, how do he know?
I don't recognize that name - Mani Deli? What is that and how is it relevant
to anything discussed with a flake of seriousness??
>The cumbersome laboring after has its own beauty.
Ok, I can respect that. Thank you.
>At the Art Institute they made us draw pure contour without
>preliminary blocking out. It was a pain.
I heard of an art instructor that wouldn't allow her students to use
erasers. Sounds just as torturous as your experience at the institute.
>Of course, to reconcile themselves to fixed mealtimes, the French make
>a great fuss about wine, whereas I sorta kinda need to get back to the
>space of just sitting-down-to, bless us o Lord for these thy gifts. I
>long ago ceased to be an oenophile. It were a phase. Today, the only
>sorta wine I'd be interested in would be Night Train.
Poor thing. Lol - TAKE CARE of yourself Eddie!!!
Edward G. Nilges
> Edward G. Nilges wrote in message ...
>
> >> b) How can they justifyably discount art that expresses these
> views -
> >> when they are exposed to them through their own act of art-making? Almost
> a
> >> hyprocrisy, is it not?
> >
> >Oui. Art is where we get to run rampant without a committment to truth
> >so as to meet Truth on the road.
>
> I see two truths in this case: (1) visionary objectivism and (2) mental
> tendency. Latter being the inclination to *think* a multitude of "what if's"
> while making art - the former, resisting the latter.
Sure, you think what might be the best alternative
>
> >Indeed, the idea that photographic art is "realistic" at all is just
> >silly when I gots DVDS with motion and sound, and the idea that the
> >DVDs are "realistic" is silly in turn once I can get a hologram let us
> >say of Elle MacPherson on whom to work my wicked will.
>
> But DVDs and holograms are dynamic expressions of multimedia. Paintings,
> drawings, and sculpture are static expressions of plain 'ol media. Apples
> and oranges. Both are fruit - but alas, different from each other.
There is no media in a strong sense...the same way in which Derrida
said "there is nothing but the text".
Derrida came up with his famous, and frequently misunderstood,
aphorism because unlike most Americans and Englishmen, Derrida had had
to read Kant, for whom relations are more important than things.
There's nothing but the text because "reality" is always mediated
through the text of interpretive understanding.
But by the exact same logic, there is no absolute "text" in the form
of "media" with an absolutely safe claim to have a knowable
relationship to reality.
The rage of the realist is that his painting will outlast
interpretation and present to succeeding generations as an image of
something else.
But DVDs and holograms, since they must undergo an interpretive
process (including even plugging the damn thing in) have no claim
higher than traditional art to really mediate "reality". Cezanne's
apples are more real. For one thing, they bring home (by their very
process of decomposition, captured by Cezanne) their existence less as
the absolute, perfect apple, or swimsuit model, presented less as an
attainable reality and more as the Platonic ideal of what we should
"want", than as a stage of loss and decomposition...far more
triumphant over time and chance than Elle MacPherson.
Consider Internet sex. It takes place at the end of a very long
production process involving things like networks and cables and by
definition exits human reproduction, which is why, to me, it is such a
sorry affair.
>
> >I do not want to deal in clear directions I have no place to lead you
> >to except down by the riverside where the catfish play.
>
> I like that.
>
> >Our first duty, love, is just to go to the museum and look and then
> >visit the shop and then have coffee, not to renarrate the experience.
>
> :-P
>
> >Ah, but we know EXACTLY what Cezanne was after: a Salon painting that
> >would reconcile form and color, which had been divided and placed at
> >war by the invention of photography.
>
> Ok... if you say so!
>
> >His paintings "speak" to us as to the cave paintings.
> >
> >Even our friend Mani Deli knows that Cezanne's figures are supposed to
> >be women. I mean, how do he know?
>
> I don't recognize that name - Mani Deli? What is that and how is it relevant
> to anything discussed with a flake of seriousness??
He don't know sheeeit
>
> >The cumbersome laboring after has its own beauty.
>
> Ok, I can respect that. Thank you.
>
> >At the Art Institute they made us draw pure contour without
> >preliminary blocking out. It was a pain.
>
> I heard of an art instructor that wouldn't allow her students to use
> erasers. Sounds just as torturous as your experience at the institute.
No, it was great. Unlike my normal high school classes at St. Viator's
I went willingly on a Saturday so as to be able to study what I wanted
with hippie girls (St. Viator was all boys).
Any restriction, I could see, apart from the fact that the models had
to wear bathing suits, was for our own good.
In fact this is why I was an early adopter of structured programming,
because my art training had taught me the power of limiting my
selections, and working within them.
From yegg tempera painting, to take another example, I taught myself
that the artist only needs a few basic colors and that when set off
appropriately, yellow ochre (considered by modern painters not a
primary yellow at all) can be your primary yellow color. If in fact it
is the closest to cadmium yellow it positively glows!
In France I bought a whole set of colored pencils, to draw at the
Louvre, and, it was far more than I needed. I experimented with a
shaded drawing of the Aphrodite where I first did the chiaroscuro in
monochrome, using a graphite pencil, and then the figure only in
orange (lightly applied) and the background in only one shade of blue.
The result pleased me.
In the 1960s, color reproduction was usually done on the cheap by
combining dots of red, green, yellow and blue. Today, the Sixties has
become like the turn of the 20th century, mediated to people who
weren't there in black and white photographs, black and white Bell and
Howell home movies filled with people smoking, and the occasional,
grainy, color film.
But in fact it was quite colorful. The cheap reproductions had their
own cheesy allure, and the girls wore paisley and painted their faces.
In this era, the art publisher Phaidon produced a series of
high-quality monographs on painters...with exclusively black and white
reproductions. The wise editors realized that the technology of the
time wasn't equal to the subtlety of a Rembrandt.
Today, we gaze at millions of colors but like the sensitive CD
listener feel cheated because the sound and display engineers are
wrong. There are no apriori limits to color sensitivity: Cezanne
proved this.
>
> >Of course, to reconcile themselves to fixed mealtimes, the French make
> >a great fuss about wine, whereas I sorta kinda need to get back to the
> >space of just sitting-down-to, bless us o Lord for these thy gifts. I
> >long ago ceased to be an oenophile. It were a phase. Today, the only
> >sorta wine I'd be interested in would be Night Train.
>
> Poor thing. Lol - TAKE CARE of yourself Eddie!!!
No, I'm cool. I have done my share of partying and am content to be a
computer geek in China and an art geek in Gay Paree.
Thur
"Edward G. Nilges" <spino...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:f5dda427.04102...@posting.google.com...
Realists "rage" no more than others."will outlast interpretation" What is
this?
Do you really mean something like "will outlast an artistic generation"?
Your version suggests that once a work of art is older than say 100 years
it cannot be interpreted truly. "as an image of something else"
That is ott.
Bright minds all over the place offer careful studies of the
best works with such problems taken into consideration
You do not compare "realist" works with the totally non-realist works,
that have been produced in our time. They challenge true interpretations
during the life of the artist.
Re primary colours.
I wish the art world would find another name, since 99.9% of all colours
are simply refelctions of those Primary Colours coming from the sun, and
nothing to do with paint or any other substance whatsoever.
Find a substance that reflects only the Primary colour Yellow and you may
have a case.
Thur
Electric Nachos
>But DVDs and holograms, since they must undergo an interpretive
>process (including even plugging the damn thing in) have no claim
>higher than traditional art to really mediate "reality". Cezanne's
>apples are more real. For one thing, they bring home (by their very
>process of decomposition, captured by Cezanne) their existence less as
>the absolute, perfect apple, or swimsuit model, presented less as an
>attainable reality and more as the Platonic ideal of what we should
>"want", than as a stage of loss and decomposition...far more
>triumphant over time and chance than Elle MacPherson.
I never thought of it that way!
And please don't scoff at my snipping - I understood everything you wrote.
"I ATE it, and appreciATE it."
Lol
Edward G. Nilges
That's the official word, of course. And then they get taken in by
forgeries.
> You do not compare "realist" works with the totally non-realist works,
> that have been produced in our time. They challenge true interpretations
> during the life of the artist.
>
> Re primary colours.
> I wish the art world would find another name, since 99.9% of all colours
> are simply refelctions of those Primary Colours coming from the sun, and
> nothing to do with paint or any other substance whatsoever.
> Find a substance that reflects only the Primary colour Yellow and you may
> have a case.
You're confusing some physical definition with the experience of
yellow, in which our experience is constantly compared in a Kantian
(so there) manifold not only with other yellows but with all other
colors.
The very idea that a wavelength, a number, which cannot even be
measured in most normal conditions beyond two digits of precision, is
"yellow" is scientism run amok.
Some clown with light meters may well measure the light coming back,
reflected off a gesso ground overpainted with translucent egg tempera,
and find it "less" than the "light" coming from a goddamn computer
screen, featuring goddamn Britney Spears.
Nonetheless, the Cimabue Virgin in the Louvre remains an experience
having more to do with "light" as we know light, which is always in an
inexhaustible manifold in which the "light" isn't asking for our
credit card number but instead presages the rising sun.
> Thur
Edward G. Nilges
I know ya do. Thanks for the comments. Love and xxx (mille baci allus
better than mille regretz darlinbabe love sweetie cookie honey. Honi
soit qui mal y pense, with a thong thwack.)
Electric Nachos
Edward G. Nilges wrote in message ...
>I know ya do. Thanks for the comments. Love and xxx (mille baci allus
>better than mille regretz darlinbabe love sweetie cookie honey. Honi
>soit qui mal y pense, with a thong thwack.)
Hold that down, Eddie...