Mani's Prescription for Learning Drawing?
Dilettante
flame wars please.
Dilettante
Mani Deli
I've recommended books, web sites, how to find a teacher and what to
avoid in art school in many former messages. You might find them in
yahoo.
Tired of Modern Art? See-
http://www3.sympatico.ca/manideli/
"Flying_Naked_People" <
comes out. Have fun!
--
Naked Angel Art
http://www.rcip.com/nerdgerl
Dilettante <hu...@myself.com> wrote in message
news:ba63903f.0310...@posting.google.com...
"Flying_Naked_People" <
----
Mani Deli <ma...@sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:nabrnvs7r57kqdve7...@4ax.com...
> On 3 Oct 2003 08:18:10 -0700, hu...@myself.com (Dilettante) wrote:
>
> >Perhaps Mani could give us some constructive tips on how to draw. No
> >flame wars please.
> >
> >Dilettante
>
Karin Switzer
the fundamentals of drawing, including perspective - but that they promote
feelings, etc.
I honestly don't know where he gets this. My work brings me into contact
with many art schools of different types (university, straight 'art school',
etc.). All of them teach these fundamentals. In most schools these are
called foundation courses and everyone has to take them.
When 'Mani' is asked to back up his claims he answers with jokes and taunts.
My guess is that he really has had no contact at all with art schools or the
art world in general. Does he have an art education himself? (anyone know?)
My guess is no.
Karin
"Dilettante" <hu...@myself.com> wrote in message
news:ba63903f.0310...@posting.google.com...
Mani Deli
<kar...@bellatlantic.net> wrote:
>I honestly don't know where he gets this. My work brings me into contact
>with many art schools of different types (university, straight 'art school',
>etc.). All of them teach these fundamentals. In most schools these are
>called foundation courses and everyone has to take them.
>
Most art schools have courses labeled Drawing. They even claim to
teach perspective in design courses. These schools convince their
students that they can draw . I've seen the results. Iv'e seen third
year illustration students that can't draw. Talent and ideas yes,
knowledge, no.
>When 'Mani' is asked to back up his claims he answers with jokes and taunts.
Because your questions are stupid!
>My guess is that he really has had no contact at all with art schools or the
>art world in general. Does he have an art education himself? (anyone know?)
>My guess is no.
Good guess!
I went to all art schools almost tuition free on scholarships. At
university while a chemistry student I attended drawing and Art
history classes. As to art school (the first one I attended was a
Bauhaus academy. Although I didn't learn much there I had a great
time. You see, I loved to hang around NYC artzy-fartzies. They were
such a relief from all those rod-up-the-ass squares.
That art school made up for its lack of teaching by providing great
sex, parties and fun company and it was tuition free. Even the
teachers were very nice although most were very ignorant. True, I
annoyed them and they expelled me. One of the best moves I ever made.
I next attended the Art Students League, a place where one could learn
something if on chose to and where one could avoid teachers one didn't
like. Here it was the students who judged the teacher; no grades, no
bullshit. If you didn't like the teacher you switched to another. And
there were those who taught fundamentals.
I even sold some of my work while a student because I had learned some
technique and drawing. In my final year I won a McDowell grant to
study in Europe. One of the award jurors who gave me his vote for a
big schmier abstraction I did was the fuhrer of modern academic art at
the time, Clement Greenberg. (I wrote about it in great detail in my
book.
And what schools did you attend?
IsdangTumbaga
Can I butt in?
Mani seems to think that Picasso has little skill, but his early years
proved that he has great skill. his later works depends greatly on name
recognition and not art any longer and he took advantage of that human
flaw, and why not?
http://www.nga.gov/education/picteach.htm
Matisse is the same, each of these masters are masters nevertheless, they
experimented, and they learned from the "classic techniques" that Mani
Deli seems to like but these masters experimented away from it, until
they were recognized in the new styles they worked with.
Drawing skills, or any skills in the arts is nothing but craft if there
is no "art" in it. Although having skill is an important factor, it is
not the only factor in creating "art", skill gives you the ability to
make the object, the art is your ability to make it presentable. Now, the
so called "kick!" involves originality in the presentation.
I know so many artist with great skill but could not present good work(I
am one of them, sometimes), I know artists with little skill but presents
impressive work.
Now, what does this tell you?
I am not impressed with Warhol, but since he admits no skill nor true
artistic sense...but he admits to be a commercial artist, now that is the
basic truth, he was a commercial artist and made his "art" a commercial
venture...honesty, I like that. But of course, now I actually like him
better than when he first came to the art scene. Did it grow on me? No,
it is the originality of his presentation that I liked. But then again,
we used to print t-shirts like that when I was growing up... made money
as well pre-Warhol days.
judith
IsdangTumbaga wrote in message <3F7F8CBD...@hidiparinginto.ito>...
>
>Can I butt in?
>
>I know so many artist with great skill but could not present good work (I
>am one of them, sometimes), I know artists with little skill but presents
>impressive work.
>
>Now, what does this tell you?
It tells you that if you aren't communicating something about your subject
or your self in the work, you're not an artist ~ good painter maybe, but not
an artist.
IsdangTumbaga
Will this be enough to quell complaints about skill? Being skillful is helpful
yet it is but another tool.
Dilettante
> Mani seems to think that Picasso has little skill, but his early years
> proved that he has great skill. his later works depends greatly on name
> recognition and not art any longer and he took advantage of that human
> flaw, and why not?
Incorrect. Picasso was still painting excellent works, like Femme
Couche, in 1971. They were an extension of cubusm.
"The postwar years also marked a period of daring experimentation in
lithography and ceramics. Although he had made prints throughout his
career, he did not concentrate on that field until the late 1940s,
when he embarked on a series of innovations that resulted in a
reevaluation of printmaking as a means of expression. He gave a
similar impetus to contemporary ceramics; his unconventional handling
of the medium opened up possibilities that are still being explored. "
source: http://www.island-of-freedom.com/PICASSO.HTM
Dilettante
Oran G. Tang
>However I can not say that ALL art schools and colleges are BAD.
You named "third-rate" schools, and anyone
who is satisfied with attending "third-rate"
schools, or non-accredited ones, is going to
get equivalence. I can't imagine why anyone
who is serious about a 4-year degree in art
would waste their time in such schools since
the degree will mean even less than it usually
does if it's in "studio art." The moment you
mention where your degree came from to anyone
who knows USA art colleges, you're
going to be laughed at if it's not from an
accredited 4-year college of fine art, or better
yet from one of the design institutes that have
a solid reputation and are nearly impossible
to get entrance to without a solid portfolio.
Dik F. Liu
<ma...@sympatico.ca> writes:
>
>Good guess!
>I went to all art schools almost tuition free on scholarships. At
>university while a chemistry student I attended drawing and Art
>history classes. As to art school (the first one I attended was a
>Bauhaus academy. Although I didn't learn much there I had a great
>time. You see, I loved to hang around NYC artzy-fartzies. They were
>such a relief from all those rod-up-the-ass squares.
>
>That art school made up for its lack of teaching by providing great
>sex, parties and fun company and it was tuition free. Even the
>teachers were very nice although most were very ignorant. True, I
>annoyed them and they expelled me. One of the best moves I ever made.
>
>I next attended the Art Students League, a place where one could learn
>something if on chose to and where one could avoid teachers one didn't
>like. Here it was the students who judged the teacher; no grades, no
>bullshit. If you didn't like the teacher you switched to another. And
>there were those who taught fundamentals.
>
>I even sold some of my work while a student because I had learned some
>technique and drawing. In my final year I won a McDowell grant to
>study in Europe. One of the award jurors who gave me his vote for a
>big schmier abstraction I did was the fuhrer of modern academic art at
>the time, Clement Greenberg. (I wrote about it in great detail in my
>book.
>
... and I am Anastasia Romanov.
Dik
Mani Deli
Tang) wrote:
> The moment you
>mention where your degree came from to anyone
>who knows USA art colleges, you're
>going to be laughed at if it's not from an
>accredited 4-year college of fine art, or better
>yet from one of the design institutes that have
>a solid reputation and are nearly impossible
>to get entrance to without a solid portfolio.
>
The moment you mention a degree in fine arts its a laugh. Nobody
except the art school staff gives a shit about a degree. What counts
is your work.
Mani Deli
<tum...@hidiparinginto.ito> wrote:
>Dilettante wrote:
>
>> Perhaps Mani could give us some constructive tips on how to draw. No
>> flame wars please.
>>
>> Dilettante
>
>Can I butt in?
>Mani seems to think that Picasso has little skill, but his early years
>proved that he has great skill.
They prove he was very average.
>his later works depends greatly on name
>recognition and not art any longer and he took advantage of that human
>flaw, and why not?
I agree I admire a good charlatan who can make millions. But at the
same time I have to laugh at all the failures out there who produced
similar crap. I admire the Modern Art forgers who fool the experts and
I admire the chimpanzees and elephants who paint better abstractions
than most of the crap in museums posing as great art.
>http://www.nga.gov/education/picteach.htm
>Matisse is the same, each of these masters are masters nevertheless, they
>experimented, and they learned from the "classic techniques"
Matisse couldn't draw anything. He isn't even a master of bullshit and
needed the critics to preach his line.
> that Mani
>Deli seems to like but these masters experimented away from it, until
>they were recognized in the new styles they worked with.
Matisse didn't do anything new.
>Drawing skills, or any skills in the arts is nothing but craft if there
>is no "art" in it.
However, no skill no art.
> Although having skill is an important factor, it is
>not the only factor in creating "art", skill gives you the ability to
>make the object,
We don't want any of that do we!
> the art is your ability to make it presentable. Now, the
>so called "kick!" involves originality in the presentation.
Most great art isn't original.
>I know so many artist with great skill but could not present good work(I
>am one of them, sometimes),
So lets see your work.
> I know artists with little skill but presents
>impressive work.
>Now, what does this tell you?
Nothing really!
>I am not impressed with Warhol, but since he admits no skill nor true
>artistic sense...but he admits to be a commercial artist, now that is the
>basic truth, he was a commercial artist and made his "art" a commercial
>venture...honesty, I like that. But of course, now I actually like him
>better than when he first came to the art scene. Did it grow on me? No,
>it is the originality of his presentation that I liked. But then again,
>we used to print t-shirts like that when I was growing up... made money
>as well pre-Warhol days.
Nothing original about Warhol except that unlike the other charlatans
out there he openly admitted it.
IsdangTumbaga
I have to qualify my post, you are right but as he got older his skill waned but all other aspects of his art
is still good.
IsdangTumbaga
> On Sun, 05 Oct 2003 03:15:05 GMT, IsdangTumbaga
> <tum...@hidiparinginto.ito> wrote:
>
> >Dilettante wrote:
> >
> >> Perhaps Mani could give us some constructive tips on how to draw. No
> >> flame wars please.
> >>
> >> Dilettante
> >
> >Can I butt in?
> >Mani seems to think that Picasso has little skill, but his early years
> >proved that he has great skill.
>
> They prove he was very average.
Average like most of us...yes of course. To degrade someone does not make your
own art any better, your art in that web-site you display for example is
average. So what is the big deal?
>
> >his later works depends greatly on name
> >recognition and not art any longer and he took advantage of that human
> >flaw, and why not?
>
> I agree I admire a good charlatan who can make millions. But at the
> same time I have to laugh at all the failures out there who produced
> similar crap. I admire the Modern Art forgers who fool the experts and
> I admire the chimpanzees and elephants who paint better abstractions
> than most of the crap in museums posing as great art.
I would not call him a charlatan.
>
> >http://www.nga.gov/education/picteach.htm
> >Matisse is the same, each of these masters are masters nevertheless, they
> >experimented, and they learned from the "classic techniques"
>
> Matisse couldn't draw anything. He isn't even a master of bullshit and
> needed the critics to preach his line.
Sorry, you could not even start in art without some kind of drawing or
whatever skill especially back then when the cost of linens and pigments are
so high compared to today.
>
> > that Mani
> >Deli seems to like but these masters experimented away from it, until
> >they were recognized in the new styles they worked with.
>
> Matisse didn't do anything new.
>
> >Drawing skills, or any skills in the arts is nothing but craft if there
> >is no "art" in it.
>
> However, no skill no art.
>
> > Although having skill is an important factor, it is
> >not the only factor in creating "art", skill gives you the ability to
> >make the object,
>
> We don't want any of that do we!
>
> > the art is your ability to make it presentable. Now, the
> >so called "kick!" involves originality in the presentation.
>
> Most great art isn't original.
>
> >I know so many artist with great skill but could not present good work(I
> >am one of them, sometimes),
>
> So lets see your work.
You will, but that is not important now.
>
>
> > I know artists with little skill but presents
> >impressive work.
>
> >Now, what does this tell you?
>
> Nothing really!
>
> >I am not impressed with Warhol, but since he admits no skill nor true
> >artistic sense...but he admits to be a commercial artist, now that is the
> >basic truth, he was a commercial artist and made his "art" a commercial
> >venture...honesty, I like that. But of course, now I actually like him
> >better than when he first came to the art scene. Did it grow on me? No,
> >it is the originality of his presentation that I liked. But then again,
> >we used to print t-shirts like that when I was growing up... made money
> >as well pre-Warhol days.
>
> Nothing original about Warhol except that unlike the other charlatans
> out there he openly admitted it.
> Tired of Modern Art? See-
> http://www3.sympatico.ca/manideli/
I have seen your art there, lots of skill...then again, not that original. I
suffer from the same. Just like you I admire Dali and the classics, but I also
admire a great number of modern arts. I am not going to be a hypocrite and
debase one for the sake of another style or technique.
DNALJM
>Visual arts. Some time later, a PhD in Art History from the Sorbonne. . .
>But I've seen enough of this group to know it's mostly amateurs and
>blowhards like you, Mani. Lots of hobby painters who are computer engineers
I've dropped out of more schools than you've graduated from and I have two
"real" jobs-maybe I should just bag it, huh?
Jane
Erik A. Mattila
> Mani Deli <ma...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 04 Oct 2003 13:26:42 GMT, "Karin Switzer"
>><kar...@bellatlantic.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>>As to art school (the first one I attended was a
>>Bauhaus academy.
>
>
> fella; nobody's that old.
Au contraire, Dano. I myself, at a tender age, received a visitation
from Johannes Itten in his hair-robe and he klee'd me in on the finer
points of art and design. It was a blavatskiating experience. I've
never had to gropius around for an art idea since.
BTW, I stumbled across a web site on Italian Futurist book design. Check
it out:
http://colophon.com/gallery/futurism/
http://www.futurism.org.uk/books/books.htm
These guys laid down the foundation that the Bauhaus picked up, I think.
I think their type work is superb - more interesting to me than their
paintings. And metal books...how kewl.
Erik
>
>
>>That art school made up for its lack of teaching by providing great
>>sex, parties and fun company and it was tuition free. Even the
>>teachers were very nice although most were very ignorant. True, I
>>annoyed them and they expelled me. One of the best moves I ever made.
>
>
> I've met a couple of guys like you. Let me guess: they didn't teach art
> 'your way', and when you kept demanding it they kicked you out. (By the
> way, this is a move *they* made, not you.) You've nursed a grudge ever
> since, right?
>
>
>>I next attended the Art Students League, a place where one could learn
>>something if on chose to and where one could avoid teachers one didn't
>>like. Here it was the students who judged the teacher; no grades, no
>>bullshit. If you didn't like the teacher you switched to another. And
>>there were those who taught fundamentals.
>
>
> And no portfolio required for entrance, leaving the door open to guys like
> you.
>
>
>>I even sold some of my work while a student because I had learned some
>>technique and drawing. In my final year I won a McDowell grant to
>>study in Europe. One of the award jurors who gave me his vote for a
>>big schmier abstraction I did was the fuhrer of modern academic art at
>>the time, Clement Greenberg. (I wrote about it in great detail in my
>>book.
>
>
> Yeah, right. And Jackson Pollock gave you head while Mark Rothko mopped
> your brow.
>
> Where is your book for sale -- I must've missed it. Or did you
> publish it under your real name?
>
>
>>And what schools did you attend?
>
>
> I didn't just attend - I graduated. BFA from Pratt, MFA from School of
> Visual arts. Some time later, a PhD in Art History from the Sorbonne.
>
> But I've seen enough of this group to know it's mostly amateurs and
> blowhards like you, Mani. Lots of hobby painters who are computer engineers
> and shoot off their mouths about art. Educated and experienced people like
> Dik Liu try to help beginners but are shouted down by the yahoos.
>
> Screw it. I'm outta here.
>
> Karin
Agathena
Dan Fox wrote:
> It was a JOKE. Jeez.
Bon jour Dan,
I believed Pratt, but the Sorbonne?
Laissez-moi rire!
When did you have time to learn French, eh?
bilingual greetings from Canada,
MW
Mani Deli
>Mani Deli <ma...@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>> On Sat, 04 Oct 2003 13:26:42 GMT, "Karin Switzer"
>> <kar...@bellatlantic.net> wrote:
>
><snip>
>>
>>As to art school (the first one I attended was a
>> Bauhaus academy.
>
>What the heck is a Bauhaus academy? You can't have attended the Bauhaus,
>fella; nobody's that old.
The place had original Bauhausers, among them was Hannis Beckman, my
two dimensional design teacher who didn't even know plane geometry and
later there were the Yale jerks freshly trained by Albers the biggest
Bauhaus boob of all who ruined more students than anyone I can name.
>> That art school made up for its lack of teaching by providing great
>> sex, parties and fun company and it was tuition free. Even the
>> teachers were very nice although most were very ignorant. True, I
>> annoyed them and they expelled me. One of the best moves I ever made.
>
>I've met a couple of guys like you.
I met tons like you. Their all over the place.
> Let me guess: they didn't teach art
>'your way', and when you kept demanding it they kicked you out. (By the
>way, this is a move *they* made, not you.) You've nursed a grudge ever
>since, right?
Right, I attended school on scholarships and sold my paintings.. That
would make anyone nurse a grudge instead of nursing the bottle like
you.
>>
>> I next attended the Art Students League, a place where one could learn
>> something if on chose to and where one could avoid teachers one didn't
>> like. Here it was the students who judged the teacher; no grades, no
>> bullshit. If you didn't like the teacher you switched to another. And
>> there were those who taught fundamentals.
>
>And no portfolio required for entrance, leaving the door open to guys like
>you.
And Norman Rockwell to Cadmus and Tooker along with a lot of
unpedigreed top schmiers and some of best illustrators who unlike you
made the grade.
>>> I even sold some of my work while a student because I had learned some
>> technique and drawing. In my final year I won a McDowell grant to
>> study in Europe. One of the award jurors who gave me his vote for a
>> big schmier abstraction I did was the fuhrer of modern academic art at
>> the time, Clement Greenberg. (I wrote about it in great detail in my
>> book.
>
>Yeah, right. And Jackson Pollock gave you head while Mark Rothko mopped
>your brow.
And Hans Hoffman wiped your ass. You can tell by the crap on your
website.
>Where is your book for sale -- I must've missed it. Or did you
>publish it under your real name?
Its on my website.
>> And what schools did you attend?
>
>I didn't just attend - I graduated. BFA from Pratt, MFA from School of
>Visual arts. Some time later, a PhD in Art History from the Sorbonne.
I lived on Washington Avenue around the block from Pratt. Use to use
their library and checked out the student work. They even had a few
good teachers. I guess you had all the jerks.
>But I've seen enough of this group to know it's mostly amateurs and
>blowhards like you, Mani.
I've seen the work of furniture store failures like you all over the
place and the net. Chimpanzees paint far better.
> Lots of hobby painters who are computer engineers
>and shoot off their mouths about art. Educated and experienced people like
>Dik Liu try to help beginners but are shouted down by the yahoos.
>
>Screw it. I'm outta here.
Ps For the lowly sum of $300 I'll send you a copy of the letter from
Stewert Klonis attesting to my grant to go to Europe. It mentions Clem
the Greeberg which I sure would thrill you no end.