http://www.informatik.umu.se/~svph0214/index.php?page=projects&proj=tjc
Feel free to give feedback either here or at eliashedlund AT gmail DOT com
* The script and all characters in this comic are based and inspired by
real life situations. The following strip contains coarse language and due
to its content it should not be viewed by anyone. The truth is always
nastier though.
/ Elias Hedlund
--
----== posted via www.jugglingdb.com ==----
Come'an people! I want some reactions here. What's your oppion about the
strip?
What do you think about when you hear the word "artistic"?
My idea of art is, to do something beyond what is necessary, so as to
embelish or give deeper meaning to the original idea. In juggling,
this means to do anything that wouldn't be considered a basic throw or
catch. Many jugglers wouldn't agree with me but, I would label; clawed
catches, overheads, penguins, behind the back, body throws and,
anything that wasn't an underhand throw with an underhand catch,
artistic juggling. That's balls only, by the way. I know that you
don't throw and catch rings underhand. It's just an example.
With these guidelines, a standard 3b cascade wouldn't be artistic.
Neither would any regular siteswap, as long as the throws and catches
were all "standard". The only way that a 3b cascade could be
considered artistic, if done completely in a standard manner, would be
to say that just holding the balls is normal and that throwing them
around in a structured manner is to artistically manipulate them but,
we're talking about juggling. Assuming that we can all
agree(hahahahaha) that the basic 3b cascade is, for all intents and
purposes, basic juggling. Then, we can agree that anything beyond the
basic throw and catch is an artistic embelishment.
However, who's to say that anything beyond the basic number patterns
isn't an artistic embelishment? 333, 4444, 55555, 666666, 7777777.
These are all basic patterns so, would 423 or 531 be artistic
embelishments of 333? Well, it depends on who you ask.
-Rico
/standing back
//waiting for the shitstorm
Something that expresses a concept or feeling without using words in the
conventional sense (spoken or written). Could be aesthetically pleasing,
but not necessarily*.
A person with an innate sensitivity to abstract concepts, who is
technically adept at expressing these ideas in any given media without
using a direct linguistic description.
I think of a type of person I'd be predisposed to like but might think
twice before calling on them to organise a pissup in a brewery.
I was labelled as 'artistic' at school as a sort of cover-all excuse for
being apparently quite eccentric and, well, artistic**.
In juggling terms I suppose it'd be used to describe moves where aesthetic
interest is considered before technical impressiveness. It would therefore
be used disparagingly by anyone who doesn't think juggling and aesthetics
are related, or who is interested specifically in the aesthetics of
technical juggling.
I get the joke but I don't like the comic. It hinges on whether or not MK
would consider taking three silicone's up the crapper to be 'artistic',
how the word as come to imply whimsical silliness. Since this bears so
little relation to MK's juggling the vulgarity would only work if there
were some cutting irony, some self referential reason for these lines to
make it clear that this isn't just a dig at MK. Perhaps there is one – a
subtectonic in-joke going under my radar... if so, 'meh' to it. The
vulgarity does not make your readers kindly disposed towards it.
Early days though, eh? Gotta try different ways of delivering em.
Neeeeext.
____
* A lot of people would have us believe only aesthetically pleasing things
are 'art'. Some extend the definition to unpleasant things too. I sidestep
the whole debate by calling everything art, eliminating it as a common
factor and placing everything on an even level. This lets us ask far more
important questions such as 'what IS it?' and 'what effect is it having?'.
** And now I'm an artist.
I think the word artistic is really over used by people who suck and by
people who are boring to watch. People who suck often use "artistic
juggling" as an excuse not to practice their fundamentals or actually be
good at juggling. Unfortunately they're often not very good at being
artistic either and when nobody likes their weird rolling around on the
floor spasmodic movements, they complain that nobody gets their art. And
then there are the cool kid tech jugglers who are so incredibly boring to
watch on stage. No eye contact, no interaction with the audience at all,
often trying tricks that are way too hard for them, with cheesy techno
music playing in the background. They usually use the word "artistic" as a
way to put down jugglers who are not as good as them and make themselves
feel better for being so boring to watch.
How's that for lazy generalizations?
Cate
P.S. I'm not entirely sure about raping Michael Karas with silicone
balls... could we find something a little more comfortable. I actually
like a lot of his stage pieces.
Ambivalence.
> What do you think about when you hear the word "artistic"?
Michael Karas.