Artist or craftsman

[Frets]

Artist or craftsman.

I consider Chet Atkins a craftsman and I consider JIm Hall an artist.
I consider Norman Rockwell a craftsman and Homer Winslow an artist.
I consider Kenny G a craftsman and Art Pepper an artist.
I consider Mark Twain a craftsman and Herman Melville an artist. (I'm on
the wall about Twain.)
I consider Dave Brubeck a craftsman and Oscar Peterson an artist.
I consider Pat Martino a craftsman and Wes Montgomery an artist. (let
those comments fly.)
This one is going to surprise those who know me: I think Jimmy Hendrix
(right spelling I hope) is an artist.
I also think that to be an artist you "generally" must be a master
craftsman first, with the exception of Hendrix in the examples.
I'm also suspicious of people who call themselves an "artist." That is
something that others say about you and not something you say about
yourself. It is sorta like calling yourself handsome or a genius.

Please don't ask for a definition of an artist or of a craftsman because
I think we all know the difference between the two and all we do is get
hung up on semantics.

Frets

[markr]

what a load!

[Frets]

Nothing I like better than inspiring intellectual debate.

Frets

markr wrote:
> what a load!
>

[joemont...@hotmail.com]

I had a friend who was an Art School M.FA (visual.). Late in life he
learned guitar by rote and burned set arrangements into his head and
played them flawlessy but knew next to nothing about harmony, improv,
musical contrasts, etc.

He used the guitar as a means to an end. He offered no apology for his
playing. Jazz guys disliked him behind his back, some right in front of
him cause he always got gigs. Audiences generally liked what they heard
him play and knew nothing of his methods. They bought his cds for
years.

Was he an artist or a craftsman?

JM

[ott...@hotmail.com]

Chet was certainly an Artist, he and his imagination came up with a
whole new way of approaching guitar, much like Lenny Breau.

I don't know if Dave B.had the chops to be a total Craftsman, but what
about all the Compositions he wrote, you can't only consider the
Instrument.

Bg

[Tone]

An entertainer.

[Pat Smith]

I'm not sure what the point of this is. These are your opinions which
you are welcome to express. I don't agree with you. First, your premise
that a craftsman isn't an artist, I respectfully disagree. All those
people are artists, even Kenny G. Just because you don't like what they
do doesn't make it invalid as art. Mark Twain was a genius.
What is a master craftsman? It's someone that has mastered his/her
craft. Jimi Hendrix played what he played and is copied by zillions of
other players. Obviously he was better at playing Hendrix style than
most that came after.

[Frets]

Since you heard him you could answer that better than I but the rote
thing seems to indicate a craftsman's approach. I have a friend like
that as well. To me it is like painting. If you always paint the exact
same red barn in all your country scenes, your a craftsman. It doesn't
matter how well you paint the red barn.

Frets

[Frets]

True on both points.

Frets

[Frets]

I didn't say I didn't like what they do, Twain is probably my favorite
writer.

But you don't agree that a craftsman and an artist are different? I
think there could be a good case made that all artists are craftsmen but
not all craftsmen are artists. There's no point here, just ramblings on
a rainy day. I'm just posing a proposition for debate. I am attempting
to provoke thoughts and comments, including my own.
Is a genius neccessarally an artist. I don't know, they might be
mutual, they might not be. It's a good question.

Frets

[markr]

===================
Your categorizing people in this fashion is totally arbitrary. These
are your opinions and nothing more. Chet Atkins developed an entirely
new approach to the guitar that is copied by people all over the
planet. Is that not the work of an "artist?" Twain wrote works of
fiction and satire that will be read a hundred years from now. That's a
pretty damn fine craftsman.

[Frets]

I didn't say that it wasn't arbitrary or anything more than opinion. I
meant it to be a talking point. Why are you so hostile and defensive?
Maybe I am wrong, but maybe you are too. I'm open to either possibilities.

Frets

[ott...@hotmail.com]

Artist or Craftsman:

This line comes up in the Movie "Lush Life" with Jeff Goldblum and
Forest Whitaker
playing a couple of musicians, with Saxman Jeff calling himself a
craftsman, but not an Artist. It's a good movie with a Great Music
score.
Bg

[josh]

But, that requires that you see the whole body of work to determine
whether someone is an artist or craftsmen, no? what if you only saw one

of the red barns and knew nothing of the painter, would it be art or
craft? It seems that you really need to be able to tell from the work
alone or all this talk is fruitless, if biographical information is
playing in to your assessments then really the terms art and craft
serve only to aid in your critique of the people. Sorry, but without a
working definition for both terms, its really difficult to have
"inspiring intellectual debate.

[juru...@aol.com]

Audiences generally liked what they heard
him play and knew nothing of his methods. They bought his cds for
years.

Was he an artist or a craftsman?

Crafty con artist?

I can settle this now. If you play better than me you must be a
craftsman because I'm an artist. Right? And yes, those grapes are
incredibly sour.

Black and Decker ( not a Craftsman)

[Gantt Kushner]

Itzak Perlman memorizes and plays the same piece the same way every time
all the time. Is he an artist or a craftsman?

Gantt

[Gerry]

In article <111cg0k...@corp.supernews.com>, Frets
<fr...@dslextreme.com> wrote:

> I'm also suspicious of people who call themselves an "artist." That is
> something that others say about you and not something you say about
> yourself. It is sorta like calling yourself handsome or a genius.

"Artist" is not a matter of quality or degree of ability. It's
somebody that makes art, even if you think the art sucks. Calling
yourself an artist doesn't mean you're good or bad or well-paid or
respected. It just means you make art.

We've cycled through this repeatedly. I'm one of the few that thinks
there are good artists and bad artist and popular artists and so forth.

> Please don't ask for a definition of an artist or of a craftsman because
> I think we all know the difference between the two and all we do is get
> hung up on semantics.

If you're categorizing folks as artist or craftsman, one or the other,
as if they are and must be mutually exclusive, then I don't know what
either word means. It seems like it's really nothing BUT semantics,
isn't it?

--
Beware of all enterprises that require new clothes.
-- Henry David Thoreau

[markr]

It wasn't intended as hostility; I was letting off steam cause I really
couldn't get on board with your premise. I suppose there is some value
in trying to classify work as either art or craft. Henry James is the
quintessential novelist while Danielle Steele is definitely not; she's
more like a "craftswoman."

[Gerry]

In article <1108780720.2...@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>,
markr <jazz...@hotmail.com> wrote:

Seems like "good" and "not good". Or "excellent" versus "functionally
operational" might be a better set of descriptors. Describing an
artist seems more useful than reclassifying them as a plumber or
something.

--
The secret of managing is to keep the guys who hate you away from the guys who
are undecided.
-- Casey Stengel

[David Moss]

"Frets" wrote...

> Please don't ask for a definition of an artist or of a craftsman because I
> think we all know the difference between the two and all we do is get hung
> up on semantics.

No, you can't throw out this premise and duck the
central issue of what the words mean. To me the
difference is that a craftsman is a guy who makes things
of practical usefulness, like a wristwatch or a chair,
whereas an artist makes things that are of no practical
use but are intended to elevate, inspire and/or entertain.

So I have to disagree with your list. For me, all musicians
are artists, whether they're good or bad, whether I
personally like their music or not. Music is practically
always useless by definition, therefore art - though I guess
at a stretch you could say that guys composing and
recording advertising jingles are craftsmen.

[Patrick Hanrahan]

"David Moss" <david.no...@anka.fzk.de> wrote in message
news:37oju0F...@individual.net...

I sort of like your argument, I see were you coming from. I too think the
definitions are the stumbling blocks. To me Art is something that touches
the soul. Stirs both emotion and intellect. But it is in the eye of the
beholder. Which explain why one could openly weep wile listing to Barber's
'Adagio for Strings' and be left cold and unaffected upon hearing 'Naima' I
guess your definition for craftsmen works but I think a more general one
like: Some one who makes something by rote or a process of learned steps
might work a little better.

The problem is in perspective. Were you see a craftsman's chair or watch as
an everyday object, I might see it as a priceless piece of Art.

I'm glad you see all musicians as artist; all thought that seem to lead to
another question. [What are the requirements for being called a musician?]
I would quantify it further by saying all musicians are trying to make art,
or should be trying. Good Art, bad Art is not really the point. Making Art
that last... now there you go. I'm not sure anyone; craftsman/artist has
any control of this. But I guess its one of the yardsticks for quality.

Personally I don't see any use creating a subset for craftsmen by calling
them Artist, but that seem to fit this human need to categorize things.
Maybe in hopes of fully understanding them; therefore appreciating them.

[onlyserious]

I saw a guy on "Antiques Roadshow" say "The BEST of any craft is Art."
I kind of agree with that. As for me, I will always be a music
student, and don't even consider myself a "player" (yet), I tell people
I am aquiring craft, and that "Art is a glow, just over the horizon"
that I aspire to.

I've heard a story where Picasso was asked "What is Art?" His reply:
"Art is a lie that allows us to see the truth." Not very helpful in
determining art from non-art. And while it is an intersting statement,
it also strikes me as absurd to substitute the word "craft" for the
"art" in Pablo's adage. There must be a difference, but your
distinctions seem arbitrary to me.

Sam

[Frets]

I suggest reading: "The whys of art"
by Robert Conquest. He quotes:

"Anthony Burgess said flatly that “Art begins with craft, and there is
no art until craft has been mastered.” There are several ways, in
writing, as in the other arts, in which the decoupling of craft and art
may be accomplished."

The whole essay should be read.

One might also consider Burgess' essays as well.

Frets

[Frets]

Come on Gerry, you sound like all it takes to be an artist is to say you
are one. That means I could piss an outline of the Pope in the snow,
call it art, and you would agree I was an artist. That certainly
demeans art.

As for categorizing, everyone her categorizes. How fast someone plays,
how slow someone plays, which guitar they play, which amp they play,
which songs they play, the list is endless. In the end everything is
semantics. Only the music itself is alive. I say my way of
categorizing is as valid as any other, and more valid than most.
I still feel all artists are craftsmen but all craftsmen aren't artists.

Frets

[Rick Ross]

"Frets" <fr...@dslextreme.com> wrote in message
news:111cg0k...@corp.supernews.com...
> Artist or craftsman.
>
you must be the reincarnation of PT

[Paul Kirk]

ouch!

[David Raleigh Arnold]

On Fri, 18 Feb 2005 11:20:54 -0800, Frets wrote:

> Artist or craftsman.

ars sine scientia nihil --Jean Mignot

"There is no such thing as art without craftsmanship." Who was
Jean Mignot? The greatest artist of his age, that's who. He was
an architect. He built cathedrals.

I don't worry about the difference with performers, only composers and
songwriters. To me, someone who isn't a craftsman is not an artist, that's
all. Otherwise, where is the love?

But in composers, Michael Kamen, Howard Shore, (Lord of the Rings) and
David Arnold (the reason I have to use my middle name) and that crowd are
not artists, and not even craftsmen in writing music. They are demon
orchestrators, but they couldn't write a decent tune for their lives.
Elmer Bernstein, (Magnificent 7) David Raksin, (Laura) even Dmitri
Tiomkin, that lot were artists. daveA

--
The only technical exercises for guitar which are worthy of the
instrument: "Dynamic Guitar Technique". No others are even close.
Get it at: http://www.openguitar.com/dynamic.html
daveA David Raleigh Arnold dra..at..openguitar.com

[LNC]

"Frets" <fr...@dslextreme.com> wrote in message
news:111cg0k...@corp.supernews.com...

> I consider Norman Rockwell a craftsman and Homer Winslow an artist.

I've read the whole thread. I've got only one question: do you consider
Winslow Homer to be as good an artist as Homer Winslow, whoeverthehell he
was?

L.N.C.

[Gerry]

In article <111fbai...@corp.supernews.com>, Frets
<fr...@dslextreme.com> wrote:

> Come on Gerry, you sound like all it takes to be an artist is to say you
> are one.

I don't think I made it sound that way. I think you made it hear that
way. In any case that's not too far from the truth. One uses their
own creative abilities to produce a specific work of art that addresses
what they consider artistic designs and intent. It's not any more or
less vast or limited than "craftsmanship" either.

> That means I could piss an outline of the Pope in the snow,
> call it art, and you would agree I was an artist. That certainly
> demeans art.

There are certainly those who do just that and I don't quibble with
their approach, I don't consider it "good art" though, I consider it
"crap art". Art nonetheless as indicated above. Someone could crap on
toast and call it "craftsmanship". That I suppose is acceptable?

Crap is crap whether it's art or not.

The difficulty I have with this flat unending "discussion" is that
somehow only "good art" is art. The rest isn't "bad art" it's not art
at all. Thus "good" is implied in the word art. I don't get that.
One labors all their life making art in one medium or another, but
never gets to be a bona fide artsist because somebody with an ascot
says it isn't art. So art is, what, some kind of public conclusion? I
just don't follow the thinking.

And I also don't think the entire construct should be assembled with
the sole intent of restricting entry to people who piss in the snow.
You'd think we'd consider the 90% of art that constitutes the bell
curve, rather than the few *outrageous* works of art that make us
thinkg and make us argue about what art is.

> As for categorizing, everyone her categorizes. How fast someone plays,
> how slow someone plays, which guitar they play, which amp they play,
> which songs they play, the list is endless. In the end everything is
> semantics. Only the music itself is alive. I say my way of
> categorizing is as valid as any other, and more valid than most.
> I still feel all artists are craftsmen but all craftsmen aren't artists.

Your approach to categorizing is just fine for you, I'm sure.

Me, I don't see any place in the world of semantics in which art is
some kind of holy thing that only becomes art once we all, to a man,
gasp when we see it. They puked when they saw cubism, somewhere along
the line it became "good art" a generation or two later it became
"transcendent art". Same is true of modern jazz--Louis Armstrong
himself was carping about bop. Somehow it became craft or art or
something.

So apparently "good" isn't even a fixed blanket conclusion. In the
meantime I don't feel like anybody's gonna burn in hell if we call
people who make art artists.

--
Honest criticism is hard to take, particularly from a relative, a friend, an
acquaintance or a stranger.
-- Franklin P. Jones

[thom_j.]

Artist? or craftsman?

Artist:
Function noun:
1 a obsolete : one skilled or versed in learned arts b archaic : PHYSICIAN c
archaic : ARTISAN
2 a : one who professes and practices an imaginative art b : a person
skilled in one of the fine arts
3 : a skilled performer; especially : ARTISTE
4 : one who is adept at something <con artist> <strikeout artist>

Craftsman:
Function noun:
1 : a worker who practices a trade or handicraft
2 : one who creates or performs with skill or dexterity especially in the
manual arts <jewelry made by European craftsmen>

ur welcome 8^)'.. alwayz curious tee'...

[ken]

Frets wrote:
> I didn't say I didn't like what they do, Twain is probably my
favorite
> writer.
>
> But you don't agree that a craftsman and an artist are different? I
> think there could be a good case made that all artists are craftsmen
but
> not all craftsmen are artists.

Liebman said that; artistry presumes craftsmanship but not the other
way around. A cabinet maker is a craftsman, but a sculptor probably
has the same skills as a craftsman.

I think craftsmanship just points to physical (or whatever else) skill
whereas artistry is about creativity.

It's hard to draw that line in music, although I would think that
studio musicians who are asked to play a 1-5 power chord heavy metal
style for a commercial jingle is acting at that moment as a craftsman
(not using much in the way of creativity) whereas just about everyone
else doing what they want to do musically are acting as artists...

People doing cover bands are also probably craftsman because there is
not much creative input on their part; they are just reproducing
skillfully what has already been done.

Anyway, to say who is a craftsman and who is an artist is probably not
very interesting (even though I just sort of did!)...

Ken

[Kurt Shapiro]

As far as my own playing goes, being a good "craftsman" would do just fine.
Being a craftsman is no mean feat. I consider myself a craftsman and only
hope I can become a good one in this lifetime.

"Frets" <fr...@dslextreme.com> wrote in message
news:111cg0k...@corp.supernews.com...

> Artist or craftsman.
>
[snip]

[Paul Kirk]

what about Homer Simpson? artist or craftsman?

PK

[Tone]

Thats what they called him when he was in the service.

[Peter Inglis - TWG]

David Raleigh Arnold wrote:
<snip> But in composers, Michael Kamen, Howard Shore, (Lord of the

Rings) and
> David Arnold (the reason I have to use my middle name) and that crowd are
> not artists, and not even craftsmen in writing music. They are demon
> orchestrators, but they couldn't write a decent tune for their lives.
> Elmer Bernstein, (Magnificent 7) David Raksin, (Laura) even Dmitri
> Tiomkin, that lot were artists. daveA

That is just hilarious!

--
Regards,

Peter Inglis - www.thewholeguitarist.com
-- email: pe...@thewholeguitarist.com
-- Read "Guitar Playing and How it Works"...
-- A new terminology and approach to the guitar based
-- on principles of the Alexander Technique and dance.
-- Videos of my guitar playing at www.thewholeguitarist.com/listen.htm

[thom_j.]

"Peter Inglis - TWG" wrote:
> Look at the love between a mother and a child - if that doesn't qualify as
> "art" I don't know what does? .... but it's pretty hard to commodify it.
Isn't this more of "a commodity of life & mother nature's nurturing"?
alwayz curious tee'..

[Peter Inglis - TWG]

Kurt Shapiro wrote:
> As far as my own playing goes, being a good "craftsman" would do just fine.
> Being a craftsman is no mean feat. I consider myself a craftsman and only
> hope I can become a good one in this lifetime.

These debates are more about power structures in society than anything
to do with what human beings do every day, which is create beauty in
their interactions with each other.

Look at the love between a mother and a child - if that doesn't qualify
as "art" I don't know what does? .... but it's pretty hard to commodify it.

The hidden agendas are often about who "owns" the "art" that is
produced, and profiting from the sale of the commodity.

[Peter Inglis - TWG]

Aahhhummmm.... you've lost me!

[thom_j.]

"Peter Inglis - TWG" <pe...@thewholeguitarist.com> wrote in message
news:421a1441$0$464$5a62...@per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au...

> thom_j. wrote:
>> "Peter Inglis - TWG" wrote:
>>
>>>Look at the love between a mother and a child - if that doesn't qualify
>>>as "art" I don't know what does? .... but it's pretty hard to commodify
>>>it.
>>
>> Isn't this more of "a commodity of life & mother nature's nurturing"?
>> alwayz curious tee'..
>
> Aahhhummmm.... you've lost me!

you too? alwayz curious tee'..

[Frets]

Great statement, can you perhaps expand on it a little?

Frets

Peter Inglis - TWG wrote:

[Peter Inglis - TWG]

Frets wrote:
> Great statement, can you perhaps expand on it a little?

>> <snip> But in composers, Michael Kamen, Howard Shore, (Lord of the
>> Rings) and
>>
>>> David Arnold (the reason I have to use my middle name) and that crowd
>>> are
>>> not artists, and not even craftsmen in writing music. They are demon
>>> orchestrators, but they couldn't write a decent tune for their lives.
>>> Elmer Bernstein, (Magnificent 7) David Raksin, (Laura) even Dmitri
>>> Tiomkin, that lot were artists. daveA

Sure - the summary dismissal of Michael Kamen, Howard Shore, David
Arnold with the statement "they couldn't write a decent tune for their
lives."

That I found hilarious.

[William C.]

"Frets" <fr...@dslextreme.com> wrote in message
news:111cg0k...@corp.supernews.com...

> Artist or craftsman.

One man's artist is another's craftsman, one man's craftsman is anothers
ar...

The Creator of creators splashes a sky with some clouds, two observers see
different forms/pictures/things in the clouds, Who is the artist, who is the
artist, as well as who. Who is the craftsman, who is the craftsman, as well
as who.

And Who is on First.

I love to play with semantics. Tangled, troubled, wallowing around in the
muck of the planet surface, so many words packing own potency(-ies) for
Each, dependent upon experience, upbringing, environment, sub-culture...
yeah, ain't semantics dandy.

However, I'd much rather go to an Arts and Crafts show over a Crafts show,
and depending on mood, may or may not choose an Art exhibit over an arts and
craft show...

I know art when I see it, hear it... I was swept into never never land
turned inside out then right side again delivered home safe and sound and
smiling, That was a blatant commercial shot that only the UnKnowing would
buy into...

Art is in the eye of the beholder.... That is some Krass Krapp Mere Pap,
What a bold statement of the existential quandry of our time that reaches
into the very soul and demands engagment...

Crafty Artisan
or as I would rather...

Artsy Fartsy

[kamch...@gmail.com]

not to be blunt, but you are retarted. anyone making creative music is
an artist. why even post this, other than to draw attention to
yourself. go practice. or if all you do is learn other peoples licks,
make up some of your own.

[Frets]

Don't "sugar coat" it, go ahead and be blunt!

Frets

[Gerry]

In article <1109108256....@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
<kamch...@gmail.com> wrote:

rmmgj welcomes you, google-groups users!

Quote the statement you're responding to, or it makes no sense to the
90% of users that don't read email via google-groups.

--
The more you can increase fear of drugs and crime, welfare mothers,
immigrants and aliens, the more you control all the people.
-- Noam Chomsky

[David Moss]

<kamch...@gmail.com> wrote...

Accusing people of being retarded is more convincing
if you'd learn how to spell it...

But I agree with your second sentence. A craftsman is,
for example, a carpenter or a watchmaker or a bricklayer -
somebody who makes things with his hands, and the word
implies somebody who does that with above average skill.
Frets seems to be using the word to mean a musician, painter
or novelist whose work he personally doesn't like. That insults
both artists and craftsmen.

[Frets]

When did I say I didn't like the work of craftsmen? Please don't put
words in my mouth. I just think the bar has been lowered in our
politically correct society to include anybody that considers themselves
"to be an artist" to be called an artist. I feel the same about the
word genius. I feel it is a denigration of our language as well as our
social aesthetics. Perhaps I have a higher regard for an artist than
some people.

Frets

[David Moss]

> When did I say I didn't like the work of craftsmen?

You call Kenny G a craftsman. What better proof could
there be that you're using "craftsman" as a term of
denigration?

[David Moss]

> I just think the bar has been lowered in our politically correct society
> to include anybody that considers themselves "to be an artist" to be
> called an artist. I feel the same about the word genius. I feel it is a
> denigration of our language as well as our social aesthetics. Perhaps I
> have a higher regard for an artist than some people.

Sorry, I wanted to answer that too. Yes, I understand where you're
coming from, there's something in what you say. Just listen to any
sports commentary these days - you've got at least 20 geniuses and
artists walking aroung on any football field!

But I think it's different when the guy you're talking about
is painting pictures, writing novels or playing music. What
he's doing is art, so he's an artist, it's as simple as that.
There are good artists, there are great artists, and there
are completely talentless, hopelessly crappy artists. But
they're still artists.

[Gerry]

In article <111pu6t...@corp.supernews.com>, Frets
<fr...@dslextreme.com> wrote:

> When did I say I didn't like the work of craftsmen? Please don't put
> words in my mouth. I just think the bar has been lowered in our
> politically correct society to include anybody that considers
> themselves "to be an artist" to be called an artist.

Has the politically correct bar-lowering extended itself to writers,
grocers, plumbers or dancers? Is anybody patroling these people to
ensure they aren't (or are--the whole PC red-herring gets me confused)
(not) politically correct too?

I never heard anybody carp about a writer or a painter, good or bad,
being called an artist. Curious only musicians have to be monitored to
catch them in the not refering to themselves as a wage-earner or
whatever is (not) PC.

I use to really chafe when in discussions with artists of whatever
medium they would say such as "artists, and musicians too". I needed
to be reminded that anybody who craps on toast is an artist, and then
there are musicians too...

I guess I was just being pompous about being excluded.

> I feel the same about the word genius. I feel it is a denigration of
> our language as well as our social aesthetics. Perhaps I have a
> higher regard for an artist than some people.

I feel the same way about the word "doughnut".

--
The secret of managing is to keep the guys who hate you away from the guys who
are undecided.
-- Casey Stengel

[David Moss]

"Gerry" wrote...

> Frets wrote:
>> I feel the same about the word genius. I feel it is a denigration of
>> our language as well as our social aesthetics. Perhaps I have a
>> higher regard for an artist than some people.
>
> I feel the same way about the word "doughnut".

You mean you have a higher regard for a doughnut than some people?

[thom_j.]

"Frets" wrote:
> Perhaps I have a higher regard for an artist than some people.

Thank you for the recognition. I am surprised you noticed? 8^)~'
alwayz curious tee'...

[Gerry]

In article <384iqhF...@individual.net>, David Moss
<david.no...@anka.fzk.de> wrote:

No I don't mean that. I mean that words mean whatever you want them to
mean. If you think that "artist" and "genius" are special words for
use in special circumstances that's fine. The dictionary doesn't tell
me this, so I guess it's coming from some "new definition" conferred by
others.

Which can be accorded to any other word as whim strikes one.

For me doughnut can mean the high point of human culture. I don't want
people making jokes about cops and doughnuts, denigrating the vast
greatness of this larger-than-life pastry item.

And so forth.

[Frets]

You're right Gerry, words mean whatever you want them to mean. Next I
want grapes at Ralph's I'll ask for apples. And then I will mock the
clerk saying' "words mean anything you want them to mean." The nice
thing about including everyone into a genius or artist category is that
you just don't have to deal with that "pesky" task of define the word.
Just saying you or someone else is a genius or artist makes it true. By
the way I am 6'7" tall, stunningly handsome, and have a full head of
naturally curly hair. There I've said it so it must be true.
Everything drops to the lowest common denominator using this thinking.
My daughter's stick figures that she drew in crayon in the third grade
now places her in the same category as Leonardo Da Vinchi. My
neighbor's son to whom I recently taught a "C" chord is now in the same
category as Barney Kessel. Wow, I created an artist, I am indeed
omniscient.

As far as your personal relationship with doughnuts, perhaps you should
start another thread. Lol

I consider "artist" and "genius" very special words. The category of
each has become so broad in our "politically correct" vernacular that it
is difficult to be "excluded," let alone have any true special meaning.

Frets

[Frets]

I chose a very bad example. You are right, I wouldn't like his playing
in either category.

Frets

[Gerry]

In article <111r3a2...@corp.supernews.com>, Frets
<fr...@dslextreme.com> wrote:

> You're right Gerry, words mean whatever you want them to mean. Next
> I want grapes at Ralph's I'll ask for apples. And then I will mock
> the clerk saying' "words mean anything you want them to mean." The
> nice thing about including everyone into a genius or artist category
> is that you just don't have to deal with that "pesky" task of define
> the word. Just saying you or someone else is a genius or artist makes
> it true.

No it doesn't. It doesnt make it false either.

Just saying somebody is a plumber or a tap-dancer doesn't make it true.
But it doesn't seem to be questioned. Why would they lie? And if they
aren't lying and it's their personal opinion, why is it so important to
you that they are using the word badly?

> By the way I am 6'7" tall, stunningly handsome, and have a full head
> of naturally curly hair. There I've said it so it must be true.

We've alreadly cycled repeatedlythrough the "'artist' needs to pass a
test" already.

> I consider "artist" and "genius" very special words.

Apparently many people do, since so many musicians for the most part
get to have this hallowed status. Why have you not conferred any
special status on "craftsman". Seems any toad with a knife can be a
"craftsman" no matter what kind of slop he whittles and nobody seems to
have any complaint with that.

And what about the phrase "amateur artist"? Does your meaning make of
this an impossibility. If you're an amateur, I imagine you can't be
special enough to be an artist, right? Just a liar, I guess.

And all this because a couple of goofs put a crucifix in faux piss? Now
nobody gets to be an artist without a badge and papers leading back tot
he Mayflower...

> The category of each has become so broad in our "politically correct"
> vernacular that it is difficult to be "excluded," let alone have any
> true special meaning.

Well, "politically correct" usually means embuing political utility to
special words. I think an artist is just describing a job a person
does (or lies about doing). You think it needs to be walled off in a
glass room. You seem to be conferring some politically utility to it.
I just think it's a profession or avocation, no robes or special hats
necessary.

Okay, I realize I'm not getting anywhere with you. You can lock up
the word and put it back in your hope chest...

[Frets]

Gerry wrote:
> In article <111r3a2...@corp.supernews.com>, Frets
> <fr...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
>
>
>>You're right Gerry, words mean whatever you want them to mean. Next
>>I want grapes at Ralph's I'll ask for apples. And then I will mock
>>the clerk saying' "words mean anything you want them to mean." The
>>nice thing about including everyone into a genius or artist category
>>is that you just don't have to deal with that "pesky" task of define
>>the word. Just saying you or someone else is a genius or artist makes
>>it true.
>
>
> No it doesn't. It doesnt make it false either.

I never said it did. It doesn't mean it is true either. Each person has
to decide on their own using their own set of values.

>
> Just saying somebody is a plumber or a tap-dancer doesn't make it true.
> But it doesn't seem to be questioned. Why would they lie? And if they
> aren't lying and it's their personal opinion, why is it so important to
> you that they are using the word badly?

Who says it isn't questioned? We make assumptions on everybody we meet
on their own assertions. I just don't think it "is" impossible to use a
word badly. If a person lies it then it simply gives us another
criterion to assess character.

>
>
>>By the way I am 6'7" tall, stunningly handsome, and have a full head
>>of naturally curly hair. There I've said it so it must be true.
>
>
> We've alreadly cycled repeatedlythrough the "'artist' needs to pass a
> test" already.
>

If that "test" has no limitations or perimeters it is meaningless.

>
>>I consider "artist" and "genius" very special words.
>
>
> Apparently many people do, since so many musicians for the most part
> get to have this hallowed status. Why have you not conferred any
> special status on "craftsman". Seems any toad with a knife can be a
> "craftsman" no matter what kind of slop he whittles and nobody seems to
> have any complaint with that.
>

Craftsman also deserves a special status. I thought we were discussing
artists, have we changed subjects?

> And what about the phrase "amateur artist"? Does your meaning make of
> this an impossibility. If you're an amateur, I imagine you can't be
> special enough to be an artist, right? Just a liar, I guess.
>

In my opinion "Amateur artist" is an oxymoron. (As an aside, Martin
Mull said that "Jazz musician" was an oxymoron.)

> And all this because a couple of goofs put a crucifix in faux piss? Now
> nobody gets to be an artist without a badge and papers leading back tot
> he Mayflower...
>

No, all this because someone masticated charcoal in a cave in France and
blew it on their hand.
>

>>The category of each has become so broad in our "politically correct"
>>vernacular that it is difficult to be "excluded," let alone have any
>>true special meaning.
>
>
> Well, "politically correct" usually means embuing political utility to
> special words. I think an artist is just describing a job a person
> does (or lies about doing). You think it needs to be walled off in a
> glass room. You seem to be conferring some politically utility to it.
> I just think it's a profession or avocation, no robes or special hats
> necessary.
>
> Okay, I realize I'm not getting anywhere with you. You can lock up
> the word and put it back in your hope chest...
>

I will thanks, I can also see I'm not getting place with you so we need
to get together, have a beer, and play some songs.

Frets

[Gerry]

In article <111s7ln...@corp.supernews.com>, Frets
<fr...@dslextreme.com> wrote:

> >>You're right Gerry, words mean whatever you want them to mean.
> >>Next I want grapes at Ralph's I'll ask for apples. And then I will
> >>mock the clerk saying' "words mean anything you want them to mean."
> >>The nice thing about including everyone into a genius or artist
> >>category is that you just don't have to deal with that "pesky" task
> >>of define the word. Just saying you or someone else is a genius or
> >>artist makes it true.
> >
> > No it doesn't. It doesnt make it false either. > I never said it
> > did. It doesn't mean it is true either. Each person has to decide
> > on their own using their own set of values.

Okay then; everybody is potentially lying about this and, by extension
of course, everything else. Me I take folks at their word. It may not
be right, but I conclude it's at least their perspective.

> > Just saying somebody is a plumber or a tap-dancer doesn't make it
> > true. But it doesn't seem to be questioned. Why would they lie?
> > And if they aren't lying and it's their personal opinion, why is it
> > so important to you that they are using the word badly?
>
> Who says it isn't questioned? We make assumptions on everybody we
> meet on their own assertions. I just don't think it "is" impossible
> to use a word badly. If a person lies it then it simply gives us
> another criterion to assess character.

You stated people use the word "genius" and "artist" and implied they
are lying, or mis-using the word, or use it to cover things that are
inapplicable. I would consider all of those "using the word badly".
You don't?

> >>I consider "artist" and "genius" very special words.
> >
> > Apparently many people do, since so many musicians for the most
> > part get to have this hallowed status. Why have you not conferred
> > any special status on "craftsman". Seems any toad with a knife can
> > be a "craftsman" no matter what kind of slop he whittles and nobody
> > seems to have any complaint with that.
> >
> Craftsman also deserves a special status. I thought we were
> discussing artists, have we changed subjects?

Check the topic header. You seem to confer "craftsman" on musicians of
lesser status than artists. I haven't seen any references to "true
craftsman" in your crusade, so I figured "craftsman" wasn't yet
annointed for weapons-grade usage.

> > And what about the phrase "amateur artist"? Does your meaning make
> > of this an impossibility. If you're an amateur, I imagine you
> > can't be special enough to be an artist, right? Just a liar, I
> > guess.
> >
> In my opinion "Amateur artist" is an oxymoron. (As an aside, Martin
> Mull said that "Jazz musician" was an oxymoron.)

All those people who paint for amusement, write poetry and
short-stories or honk on a tuba. What are they if not amateur artists?
Amateur craftsman. Assume that somebody, anybody is an artist. Did it
happen on a Tuesday afternoon when they weren't looking. Did a third
party make the decision? I find this all very complicated.

> I will thanks, I can also see I'm not getting place with you so we
> need to get together, have a beer, and play some songs.

I'd like that much better. Bring a dictionary, though...

[Frets]

Gerry wrote:
> In article <111s7ln...@corp.supernews.com>, Frets
> <fr...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
>
>
>>>>You're right Gerry, words mean whatever you want them to mean.
>>>>Next I want grapes at Ralph's I'll ask for apples. And then I will
>>>>mock the clerk saying' "words mean anything you want them to mean."
>>>>The nice thing about including everyone into a genius or artist
>>>>category is that you just don't have to deal with that "pesky" task
>>>>of define the word. Just saying you or someone else is a genius or
>>>>artist makes it true.
>>>
>>>No it doesn't. It doesnt make it false either. > I never said it
>>>did. It doesn't mean it is true either. Each person has to decide
>>>on their own using their own set of values.
>
>
> Okay then; everybody is potentially lying about this and, by extension
> of course, everything else. Me I take folks at their word. It may not
> be right, but I conclude it's at least their perspective.

We are just different. If we both were at a mall and a man came up with
his hand in his shirt and said he was Napoleon Bonaparte, I would say,
"you're nuts." Would you ask, "where's Josephine?" You're brighter
than that.

>
>
>>>Just saying somebody is a plumber or a tap-dancer doesn't make it
>>>true. But it doesn't seem to be questioned. Why would they lie?
>>>And if they aren't lying and it's their personal opinion, why is it
>>>so important to you that they are using the word badly?
>>
>>Who says it isn't questioned? We make assumptions on everybody we
>>meet on their own assertions. I just don't think it "is" impossible
>>to use a word badly. If a person lies it then it simply gives us
>>another criterion to assess character.
>
>
> You stated people use the word "genius" and "artist" and implied they
> are lying, or mis-using the word, or use it to cover things that are
> inapplicable. I would consider all of those "using the word badly".
> You don't?

Reread what I said.

>
>
>>>>I consider "artist" and "genius" very special words.
>>>
>>>Apparently many people do, since so many musicians for the most
>>>part get to have this hallowed status. Why have you not conferred
>>>any special status on "craftsman". Seems any toad with a knife can
>>>be a "craftsman" no matter what kind of slop he whittles and nobody
>>>seems to have any complaint with that.
>>>
>>
>>Craftsman also deserves a special status. I thought we were
>>discussing artists, have we changed subjects?
>
>
> Check the topic header. You seem to confer "craftsman" on musicians of
> lesser status than artists. I haven't seen any references to "true
> craftsman" in your crusade, so I figured "craftsman" wasn't yet
> annointed for weapons-grade usage.

You're setting the hierarchy I simply separated the two.

>
>
>>>And what about the phrase "amateur artist"? Does your meaning make
>>>of this an impossibility. If you're an amateur, I imagine you
>>>can't be special enough to be an artist, right? Just a liar, I
>>>guess.
>>>
>>
>>In my opinion "Amateur artist" is an oxymoron. (As an aside, Martin
>>Mull said that "Jazz musician" was an oxymoron.)
>
>
> All those people who paint for amusement, write poetry and
> short-stories or honk on a tuba. What are they if not amateur artists?
> Amateur craftsman. Assume that somebody, anybody is an artist. Did it
> happen on a Tuesday afternoon when they weren't looking. Did a third
> party make the decision? I find this all very complicated.

I am sorry that I have confused you. We are both adults, we grew from
infants, did it happen on a Friday?

>
>
>>I will thanks, I can also see I'm not getting place with you so we
>>need to get together, have a beer, and play some songs.
>
>
> I'd like that much better. Bring a dictionary, though...
>

Lol

You can't convince me that words are arbitrary to you especially since
you are one of the best "wordsmiths" posting here.

Frets

[Gerry]

In article <111sf9v...@corp.supernews.com>, Frets
<fr...@dslextreme.com> wrote:

> > Okay then; everybody is potentially lying about this and, by extension
> > of course, everything else. Me I take folks at their word. It may not
> > be right, but I conclude it's at least their perspective.
>
> We are just different. If we both were at a mall and a man came up with
> his hand in his shirt and said he was Napoleon Bonaparte, I would say,
> "you're nuts." Would you ask, "where's Josephine?" You're brighter
> than that.

You're going to the end of the bell curve for the "example". I've
never met anybody who lied about being Napoleon. I've met a lot of
artists, or people who were lying about being artists.

> > Check the topic header. You seem to confer "craftsman" on musicians of
> > lesser status than artists. I haven't seen any references to "true
> > craftsman" in your crusade, so I figured "craftsman" wasn't yet
> > annointed for weapons-grade usage.
>
> You're setting the hierarchy I simply separated the two.

In your separations you've disregarded appropriate usage or any other
consideration of the word "craftsman". I wonder why usage of that
word, apparopriate or otherwise doesn't seem to be as important as the
word "artist".

> > All those people who paint for amusement, write poetry and
> > short-stories or honk on a tuba. What are they if not amateur artists?
> > Amateur craftsman. Assume that somebody, anybody is an artist. Did it
> > happen on a Tuesday afternoon when they weren't looking. Did a third
> > party make the decision? I find this all very complicated.
>
> I am sorry that I have confused you. We are both adults, we grew from
> infants, did it happen on a Friday?

An interesting way to avoid answering difficult questions.

Nobody has called into question lying about being an adult or compared
it to the word "genius". No third party has to sanction the
classification as "adult". But these are apparently part of the
distinctions about being an artist.

> You can't convince me that words are arbitrary to you especially since
> you are one of the best "wordsmiths" posting here.

Thank you. I believe your'e convinced, but in the same way I lie about
being an artist, I think you're lying about being convinced.

[Frets]

Gerry wrote:

> In article <111sf9v...@corp.supernews.com>, Frets
> <fr...@dslextreme.com> wrote:
>
>
>>>Okay then; everybody is potentially lying about this and, by extension
>>>of course, everything else. Me I take folks at their word. It may not
>>>be right, but I conclude it's at least their perspective.
>>
>>We are just different. If we both were at a mall and a man came up with
>>his hand in his shirt and said he was Napoleon Bonaparte, I would say,
>>"you're nuts." Would you ask, "where's Josephine?" You're brighter
>>than that.
>
>
> You're going to the end of the bell curve for the "example". I've
> never met anybody who lied about being Napoleon. I've met a lot of
> artists, or people who were lying about being artists.

You talk about me " going to the end of the bell curve," when it comes
to this
you are a true "artist." I'm just trying to keep up.

You only need to cite one counter example to disprove a blanket
assertion no matter how absurd.

[David Moss]

"Frets" wrote...

> In my opinion "Amateur artist" is an oxymoron.

Well, you're wrong. Van Gogh never made enough with
his painting to support himself. Gauguin lived on the fortune
he'd made as a stockbroker by the time he was 40. Degas
came from an aristocratic banking family and could pursue
his painting hobby as the classic 19th century gentleman
amateur. Da Vinci had a day job designing cannons and
siege engines for Italian potentates. There's no way you can
argue that only professionals can be artists.

[Gerry]

In article <3898u6F...@individual.net>, David Moss
<david.no...@anka.fzk.de> wrote:

What said they were artists? In fact some folks think if you don't
make money, and a significant amount, then you're "less" an artist than
another. I've heard such claptrap repeated here endlessly.

The fact is this: if we can't define what "art" is, any definition of
artist as somebody who creates same, is impossible. And so it's
impossible.

--
In my hut this Spring, There is nothing-There is everything!
-- Sodo

[Five Sharp]

I'm a craftist.

#####

<esc...@hotmail.com> schreef in bericht
news:1108766891....@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com...
> But, that requires that you see the whole body of work to determine
> whether someone is an artist or craftsmen, no? what if you only saw one
> of the red barns and knew nothing of the painter, would it be art or
> craft? It seems that you really need to be able to tell from the work
> alone or all this talk is fruitless, if biographical information is
> playing in to your assessments then really the terms art and craft
> serve only to aid in your critique of the people. Sorry, but without a
> working definition for both terms, its really difficult to have
> "inspiring intellectual debate.
>

[Tom Walls]

In article <389dkkF...@individual.net>, d.on...@chello.nl says...

> I'm a craftist.
>
> #####
>

Or possibly an artsman.
--
Tom Walls
the guy at the Temple of Zeus

[Frets]

You are talking about economic circumstances David. You can have both
an impoverished or wealthy amateur or professional boxer.

I would be the first to wish economic freedom to all artists for the
"truth and beauty" they give our small round blue ball, unfortunately,
most societies choose (as your examples point out) to bestows that on
others; like athletes.

Frets
,

[David Moss]

"Frets" wrote...

> You are talking about economic circumstances David. You can have both an
> impoverished or wealthy amateur or professional boxer.

No, I'm talking about what the words professional
and amateur mean. Professional = does it for a living,
amateur = doesn't do it for a living. Your statement
that "amateur artist is an oxymoron" is wrong. Many
of the greatest artists in history were amateurs.

[Max Leggett]

"Amateur" means lover, a lover of the arts. It has nothing to do with
competence.

--------------------------------------------------------------
"If the gods wanted us to twist our spines about
while we played guitar, they would have given us
rubber bands rather than vertebrae. And then where
would humanity be? Propelling cornflakes box
submarines in some alien bathtub in an ungodly
time dimension where the music of the spheres
consisted of Kenny G."
Spinoza
--------------------------------------------------------------

[David Moss]

"Max Leggett" wrote...

> "Amateur" means lover, a lover of the arts. It has nothing to do with
> competence.

Precisely.

In can also mean a lover of science or sports, for example.
Many of the great 19th century scientists were amateurs,
and at that time in sport "professional" was a term of contempt.
How times change.

[Frets]

You are a brave man to step in here Max. I hope you have your suit of
mail at the ready...... Lol

Frets

[Max Leggett]

On Sat, 26 Feb 2005 12:21:17 -0800, Frets <fr...@dslextreme.com>
wrote:

>You are a brave man to step in here Max. I hope you have your suit of
>mail at the ready...... Lol

My epidermis is three parts asbestos and one part gin.

[Frets]

David: I "was" somewhat "tongue in cheek" with my reply to Gerry but I
do believe that an amateur or "a lover of the arts" is in the stage of
gathering tools and skills that may someday make them an artist or a
professional. I maintain that simply having one tool or skill out of a
myriad of skills or tools needed to be an artist or professional doesn't
place them automatically in the classification of artist or professional.
My premise is that a better nomenclature would be craftsman rather than
artist. I am discounting all economic ramifications.
Gerry believes otherwise, he, of course, is wrong.

Frets

[David Moss]

> I do believe that an amateur or "a lover of the arts" is in the stage of
> gathering tools and skills that may someday make them an artist or a
> professional.

I can only repeat what I said, you're misusing the word
professional. It just means somebody who does it for a
living. It carries no particular implication that what
you do is of any special artistic value. Kenny G is a
professional musician, but I greatly prefer the music
of many amateurs on this newsgroup.

Or consider a quote I heard from Wes, defending his
later, more commercial recordings. He said, I'm
a professional musician and this is what professional
musicians do. Artistic integrity is for amateurs.

[Frets]

You are the one who brought up professional. I was talking about
artists verses craftsmen.

Frets

[David Moss]

"Frets" wrote...

> You are the one who brought up professional. I was talking about artists
> verses craftsmen.

You were the one who brought up "amateur
artist is an oxymoron". I was reacting to that.
Professional came into the discussion because
what is not amateur is professional.

[thom_j.]

"Frets" wrote:
> Gerry believes otherwise, he, of course, is wrong.

Can this be true? extremely intrigue'ing'ly curious tee'