catherine Ashley contemporary artist--Charles Wyndham
melvi...@my-deja.com
of today.Go to the website page of artists on the internet,read her
personal profile--look at what she claims to be selling as art.Or look
up any other modern contemporary artists works-
Then Charles you tell me we are not in a 200 years dark ages?was the
20th century a whiz of cultural/artistic excellence?Of course not!
Charles you or no one can put any evidence on this newsgroup or any
other to prove me wrong.I'll worry about my credibility and you can
worry about yours.
melvin3620
Sent via Deja.com
http://www.deja.com/
melvi...@my-deja.com
Charles you will find catherine ashley on rec.arts.fine click on her
web page and amuse/amaze yourself;thusly I will be proven right!We
are in a 200 years mini cultural dark ages!
melvin3620
jimmy adams
revealing yourself as a frustrated artist.
Beyond that, remember that the XXth century was that of Picasso, Dali,
Magritte, Ernst, Chagall and Hockney, to name but six. Remember that
"the greatest of the arts is pastrymaking, with its offshoot
architecture", and think of the Guggenheim, the Chrysler building,
Sydney Opera House, Chek Lap Kok terminal building, La Defence ...
Mind you, they built some pretty nifty cathedrals in the dark ages, too.
--
jra...@bigfoot.com
melvi...@my-deja.com
Norfolk,Va television anchors agreed when they put my art on that I
Could out paint the childish art garbage of Picasso and Chigal-it
didnt take any artistic talent to paint thier works AND YOU DAMN WELL
KNOW IT!!!The only problem I have with people like you--is I AM AN
AMERICAN BORN ARTIST!!I have tears in my eyes for my country's hatred
of its own artistic talented!Until you have seen my art.paintings
dont knock them or me!Why do you find it so hard to support an American
artist?Send me your snail mail address and I'Ll send you some photos!
Then if you can be honest compare me to Picasso-Chigal and then tell
this newsgroups posters who is better!
in the meantime check out my artistic credits...@msn.com
melvin3620
melvi...@my-deja.com
melvi...@my-deja.com wrote:
> In article <Pw5pPBAx...@eddlewood.demon.co.uk>,
> Norfolk,Va television anchors agreed when they put my art on that I
> Could out paint the childish art garbage of Picasso and Chigal-it
> didnt take any artistic talent to paint thier works AND YOU DAMN WELL
> KNOW IT!!!The only problem I have with people like you--is I AM AN
> AMERICAN BORN ARTIST!!I have tears in my eyes for my country's hatred
> of its own artistic talented!Until you have seen my art.paintings
> dont knock them or me!Why do you find it so hard to support an
American
> artist?Send me your snail mail address and I'Ll send you some photos!
> Then if you can be honest compare me to Picasso-Chigal and then tell
> this newsgroups posters who is better!
>
melvi...@my-deja.com
Ward Stewart
Sheer nonsense and-or sour grapes. I have looked at Ms Ashley's site
and pictures and they are not all that bad, not, perhaps, your dish
of tea and, I suspect, not mine.
Be reminded that art criticism is all utter balderdash because there
is no one able or equipped to pass on the art of the day. In support
of this rather sweeping assertion be reminded that Vincent Van Gogh
sold NOT ONE SINGLE painting in his lifetime.
ward
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am continually amused by the notion that one percent of the
population should be somehow able to subvert, to suborn, the
Supreme Court of the United States --- and then to go on and
bully the American Medical Association into publishing
scientific conclusions that they know are wrong.
It would be funny were the implications of such
irrational hatred not so destructive to the very
fabric of our republic.
ward
-------------------------------------------------------------
Vincent Maycock
"Ward Stewart" <wste...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote in message
news:3a5cbf93.6427649@news-server...
snip
> >> > jra...@bigfoot.com wrote:
> >> > > In article <937jnu$ser$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, melvi...@my-deja.com
> >> > writes
> >> > > >Catherine Ashley is rated one of the top modern contemporary
> >> artists
> >> > > >of today.Go to the website page of artists on the internet,read
> >her
> >> > > >personal profile--look at what she claims to be selling as art.Or
> >> > look
> >> > > >up any other modern contemporary artists works-
> >> > > >
> >> > > >Then Charles you tell me we are not in a 200 years dark ages?was
> >> the
> >> > > >20th century a whiz of cultural/artistic excellence?Of course
> >not!
>
> Sheer nonsense and-or sour grapes. I have looked at Ms Ashley's site
> and pictures and they are not all that bad, not, perhaps, your dish
> of tea and, I suspect, not mine.
Right, I think the paintings are quite acceptable, despite any apparent
changes in their appearance that may happen to the paintings.
--
Vince
Vincent Maycock
"jimmy adams" <ji...@eddlewood.demon.co.uk> wrote in message
news:Pw5pPBAx...@eddlewood.demon.co.uk...
> In article <937jnu$ser$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, melvi...@my-deja.com writes
> >Catherine Ashley is rated one of the top modern contemporary artists
> >of today.Go to the website page of artists on the internet,read her
> >personal profile--look at what she claims to be selling as art.Or look
> >up any other modern contemporary artists works-
> >
> >Then Charles you tell me we are not in a 200 years dark ages?was the
> >20th century a whiz of cultural/artistic excellence?Of course not!
> >
> >Charles you or no one can put any evidence on this newsgroup or any
> >other to prove me wrong.I'll worry about my credibility and you can
> >worry about yours.
> >
> Melvin, you have somewhat compromised your position by (previously)
> revealing yourself as a frustrated artist.
I don't think Melvin said he was frustrated, although I suppose some people
are. I once tried to paint, for example, but some brush-strokes were always
rather hard to always do correctly in certain situations.
--
Vince
melvi...@my-deja.com
How many of Catherine Ashley's paintings would you two buy and hang in
either the living room of your homes or in your personal work offices?
Would you even hang them for free?Of course NOT!!Let's have some
honesty;its free!
melvin3620 iolinc.net/luck-5 check me out-NO PAINTINGS EVER SOLD;
THIS IS A PATRIOTIC EFFORT ONLY AS AN ARTIST!Look and learn.
"Vincent Maycock" <maycock...@andrews.edu> wrote:
>
> "Ward Stewart" <wste...@hawaii.rr.com> wrote in message
> news:3a5cbf93.6427649@news-server...
>
> snip
>
> > >> > jra...@bigfoot.com wrote:
> > >> > > In article <937jnu$ser$1...@nnrp1.deja.com>, melvin3620@my-
Laurie S.
>In article <Pw5pPBAx...@eddlewood.demon.co.uk>,
>Norfolk,Va television anchors agreed when they put my art on that I
>Could out paint the childish art garbage of Picasso and Chigal-it
>didnt take any artistic talent to paint thier works AND YOU DAMN WELL
>KNOW IT!!!
I looked up Chagall, whose work I wasn't familiar with. I don't care
for most of it, although there were a couple I thought were okay, and
quite a few of the images I saw (10-15 or so) did seem pretty
rudimentary, as did some of Picasso's works. But Picasso had a pretty
wide range of styles -- while I don't care for the cubist stuff, the
Blue Nude has been one of my favorite paintings since I was a child,
and there are a number of other Picassos that I like as well. There
are others that I don't like as well, but can at least see artistry in
them.
Do you know Egon Schiele? He's the favorite of a close friend of mine.
He was an impressionist artist, working mostly with nudes. I like some
of his stuff, but he wouldn't be my choice as a favorite artist (I
prefer Van Gogh and Monet). Still, my friend likes him, so I studied
his works more closely than I might have otherwise.
This friend is an artist himself, in his late 50s, who has only
recently started to market his work, after retiring from his "real
job." He secured a domain name on the net, made some business
contacts, set himself up as a business, had some people looking into
possible gallery showings, and started selling paintings by word of
mouth. He'd sold several the last time I talked to him, which was
several months ago.
He has many, many of his paintings all over his house, on walls,
stacked here and there, and I don't know if he'd easily find a taker
for all of them at once, as you're trying to do. I think it's
admirable that you're willing to part with all of your paintings to
have them shown in a single exhibition area, but I don't know how many
sites would have the space to display 250 (I think that's how many you
said you had) paintings of any one artist. Maybe it's an overwhelming
offer for people with limited space for such displays (I'm not sure if
that's exactly what you're asking, for the paintings to be displayed
all at one time, in one location, year round, or what).
Perhaps you could start by donating a painting here and there for a
local charity auction, or working on a gallery showing to create
current public interest in your work, and from *there* make your
offer. If you first attracted attention by the *actual* display of
your work, then immediately followed with a public offer, the offer
might benefit from interest sparked by public viewing of the works. I
don't know if some of this is off base; maybe you'd tried some of this
and it hasn't worked.
I did look at the web page you listed and saw the painting you posted.
It was a little hard to get a good look because it was small, but I
found it intriguing. It's not exactly the style of painting that's my
favorite, but I like some of the elements of it. It reminds me to some
extent of my friend's work. I'd like to see more, but I don't know why
it's not working for you to send me an attachment.
Since you did get a photo onto a web page, I wondered if you'd be
willing to post a handful of your paintings in a larger size on that
page or a page attached to it, even if just long enough for us posters
to get a chance to peruse a variety of your paintings. I think people
here would be interested.
>The only problem I have with people like you--is I AM AN
>AMERICAN BORN ARTIST!!I have tears in my eyes for my country's hatred
>of its own artistic talented!
Who says anyone hates American artists? It's not a slam against New
Orleans artist Douglas Bourgiouse (sp?) that more people are
interested in Picasso's work than his.
Furthermore, there have been famed American artists, no?
I think you need to accept that rejection of you is not rejection of
American artists. There are an awful lot of people in this country who
are quite gifted artists; there are local and area art displays all
the time around where I live, and some of the paintings are absolutely
beautiful, IMO as beautiful as some famed works of the past.
But talent is not the only way people get notoriety. It doesn't work
that way in literature or music, either. Some of it comes down to
luck, some to opportunity, etc. Like Ward Stewart said, Van Gogh never
sold a painting in his life.
>Until you have seen my art.paintings
>dont knock them or me!
I don't think Jimmy is knocking you or your artwork, Melvin, and I
don't think he's venturing any opinions on Picasso or Chagall, either.
>Why do you find it so hard to support an American
>artist?Send me your snail mail address and I'Ll send you some photos!
>Then if you can be honest compare me to Picasso-Chigal and then tell
>this newsgroups posters who is better!
>
It's not really a question of who is better. Art is subjective. Some
people like impressionism, some don't, for example. And some prefer
some artists to other artists. Some people would prefer your work to
that of Picasso's; some would not. And some people would prefer
Picasso simply on the basis that he was a famed artist, I'm afraid.
I don't understand why you seek comparison of your work to that of
famous artists anyway, or why you seem so bent to prove that you are
better. If I ever finish my novel, I imagine that I'll not easily get
it published, and that having written scores of newspaper articles and
columns won't be of any help. I would hope that in my frustration I
wouldn't grumble that I'm better than Hemingway and no one will admit
it. If my work sells, it's got to be on its own merit, but it also has
to make it through the cracks.
>in the meantime check out my artistic credits...@msn.com
>
I don't understand where you're directing people here. This is an
email address. Are you asking people to email you so you can email
them some text with the credits, or did you type the email address
when you mean to type a web address where people could go to read
about these credits?
>melvin3620
Laurie
---
www.geocities.com/tobyneige/life.html
---
"If you can't believe in yourself,
believe in someone who believes in you."
Laurie S.
>Catherine Ashley is rated one of the top modern contemporary artists
>of today.
By whom?
>Go to the website page of artists on the internet,
Do you have a URL?
>read her
>personal profile--look at what she claims to be selling as art.
I didn't find anything on her name in a web search, so I searched for
her name on Deja and came up with 11 hits, all of which were your
posts except for one original post by her with a link to her web page.
I followed it and looked at her site and her paintings. They're not
exactly my style, but I wouldn't slam them, and they're certainly art.
So what's your beef with her?
>Or look
>up any other modern contemporary artists works-
>
>Then Charles you tell me we are not in a 200 years dark ages?was the
>20th century a whiz of cultural/artistic excellence?Of course not!
>
Artistic excellence, whatever that means, is not something that comes
and goes over time. There have always been people with artistic
talent; I imagine there always will be people with artistic talent.
Excellence in math, for example, can be measured more conveniently
than can artistic excellence. What is seen as "good art" is
subjective, but I've seen many paintings of the past century that I
have liked very much. For example, I prefer Monet to Terry Redlin, but
it isn't because Monet lived in a different century. It's because I'm
not fond of Redlin's use of dark colors, but I can still admire his
talent.
In art, whether it's visual or literary or whatever, there is always
the tendency to look toward the past, to laud long-dead artists and
writers more readily than those who are still producing works. Part of
that, I think, is because the only thing we have of the artists of the
past are the works they created, while the current ones are still
creating. People tend to feel more about the dead than the living, I
guess. If Elvis had lived while continuing on a downward spiral, maybe
he would today be performing at state fairs as a has-been -- who
knows?
>Charles you or no one can put any evidence on this newsgroup or any
>other to prove me wrong.I'll worry about my credibility and you can
>worry about yours.
Um, Melvin, you're talking about subjective stuff. Art isn't about
what's good or what's bad, it's about what people like, and people
like a lot of different styles. Some of what you might find ugly or
disgusting might involve quite a bit of talent, even though you don't
personally like it.
Laurie
melvi...@my-deja.com
I am not getting through to you people-so I will try one more time in a
different way.And you will have to tsake my word on this.the Professor
at West Virginia University CREATIVE Art Center sent me on a
mission;being a very patriotic American,I accepted the challenge.
The professor said'"There are only one or two creative artists born to
a century.You are either one of the two or the ONLY one born in the
20th century.Now we dont need you to sell paintings and make a lot of
money.You have a good retirement income.We need you to get AMERICAN
ART up into its rightful place in the world."
I have tried everything you can name for the past 25years.If it was
easy it would already have been done.I want my own museum like France
built for Chigall in Southern France.Not necessarily built by the US
government.I am fed up with American museums of foreign gibberish art!!
I A national Museum of AMERICAN ART ONLY!
I have already been called America's Van Gogh and I am not interested
in the job!
Texas A+M wanted my paintings;but refused to give maintainance/exhibit
contract guarantees.
melvin3620
The professor and I and his mission."Until death do us part."
jimmy adams
<lea...@spacestar.net> writes
>
>I don't think Jimmy is knocking you or your artwork, Melvin, and I
>don't think he's venturing any opinions on Picasso or Chagall, either.
I certainly wasn't knocking Melvin's art, Laurie, not having seen it.
What I was doing was answering his contention that we were in a barren
period for art. I picked the first six XXth century painters I could
think of *who had painted like no-one before them*. Liking or not liking
is purely a personal matter, but if Melvin holds that these six guys did
not change *ideas about painting*, then I think that he is in need of
further information.
Great artists through the centuries have seen their object being to
change our view of the world, rather than to show it to us as we already
know it to be.
>
>>Why do you find it so hard to support an American
>>artist?Send me your snail mail address and I'Ll send you some photos!
>>Then if you can be honest compare me to Picasso-Chigal and then tell
>>this newsgroups posters who is better!
>>
As a believer in a free market, and having already said that preference
is a personal matter, I'd have to ask: which will fetch most at auction?
--
jra...@bigfoot.com
Vincent Maycock
snip
> >>Why do you find it so hard to support an American
> >>artist?Send me your snail mail address and I'Ll send you some photos!
> >>Then if you can be honest compare me to Picasso-Chigal and then tell
> >>this newsgroups posters who is better!
> >>
> As a believer in a free market, and having already said that preference
> is a personal matter, I'd have to ask: which will fetch most at auction?
I don't think that's a good question when dealing with art. It's more
important for a painting to mean something to someone than for it to fetch
the most money at an auction, although I suppose any form of art will fetch
a lot of money under most circumstances.
--
Vince
Vincent Maycock
"Laurie S." <lea...@spacestar.net> wrote in message
news:3a585e53....@news.spacestar.net...
snip
> In art, whether it's visual or literary or whatever, there is always
> the tendency to look toward the past, to laud long-dead artists and
> writers more readily than those who are still producing works. Part of
> that, I think, is because the only thing we have of the artists of the
> past are the works they created, while the current ones are still
> creating. People tend to feel more about the dead than the living, I
> guess. If Elvis had lived while continuing on a downward spiral, maybe
> he would today be performing at state fairs as a has-been -- who
> knows?
What if he had lived a few months longer, rather than just going on and on?
I'm just curious about your opinion about this.
> >Charles you or no one can put any evidence on this newsgroup or any
> >other to prove me wrong.I'll worry about my credibility and you can
> >worry about yours.
>
> Um, Melvin, you're talking about subjective stuff. Art isn't about
> what's good or what's bad, it's about what people like, and people
> like a lot of different styles. Some of what you might find ugly or
> disgusting might involve quite a bit of talent, even though you don't
> personally like it.
Right. Each person has their own preferences, and it's not something to
worry about. But regardless of what kinds of stories we can manage to think
up to explain things, there is still that essential element of curiosity, of
"How would this person react to this under controlled circumstances, so that
at least some stories can be eliminated with certainty?" It's something that
should certainly cause people to be curious, I think. But I'm also curious
about peoples' genuine self-evaluations about how *they* think they would
react, if certain things were true.
--
Vince
Vincent Maycock
snip
> I don't understand why you seek comparison of your work to that of
> famous artists anyway, or why you seem so bent to prove that you are
> better.
Everyone wants that to some degree, I think, but some people are just better
at it than others. I'm not saying that's what his problem is, but maybe that
*is* an adequate explanation.
> If I ever finish my novel, I imagine that I'll not easily get
> it published, and that having written scores of newspaper articles and
> columns won't be of any help.
Why wouldn't that help? How can you be so sure you won't be able to publish
it? Couldn't you just as easily imagine that it would be easily published?
Or is that not realistic?
> I would hope that in my frustration I
> wouldn't grumble that I'm better than Hemingway and no one will admit
> it.
It's sort of a situation where you say, "I have told the truth, this is how
I feel, and that's all there is to it." What happens after that shouldn't be
your problem, I think. Maybe things might change in that situation; I don't
know.
> If my work sells, it's got to be on its own merit, but it also has
> to make it through the cracks.
That would be really sweet for you if it did; I mean, I would want that, if
it were my book, so I guess I would assume you would be happy, if that
happened. But it's not something that has a potential for harming anything
in any way.
--
Vince
Laurie S.
<maycock...@andrews.edu> wrote:
>
>"Laurie S." <lea...@spacestar.net> wrote in message
>news:3a584d74....@news.spacestar.net...
>
>snip
>
>> I don't understand why you seek comparison of your work to that of
>> famous artists anyway, or why you seem so bent to prove that you are
>> better.
>
>Everyone wants that to some degree, I think, but some people are just better
>at it than others. I'm not saying that's what his problem is, but maybe that
>*is* an adequate explanation.
>
Well, maybe. I mean, sure, I can relate to the concept of feeling that
your work is better than what you see on the open market, but what I
don't relate to is the feeling that scads of other people are not
noticing. To me, the first feeling should be an impetus to place your
own work on the market. Only then can the second feeling really apply,
since if your stuff's not marketed, the scads of people don't see it.
But Melvin isn't looking to market his work. He's looking for someone
to provide a showplace for it -- for all of it (250 paintings, IIRC).
That's a huge undertaking for an organization. If he were simply
looking for gallery showings, and was getting snubbed, his beef would
make more sense, IMO.
>> If I ever finish my novel, I imagine that I'll not easily get
>> it published, and that having written scores of newspaper articles and
>> columns won't be of any help.
>
>Why wouldn't that help?
Because newspaper articles and columns don't establish me in the
larger community. A novel written by an unknown isn't going to sell
any better just because the writer wrote for a local newspaper for
years, except perhaps in the city where the writer lives, and perhaps
to some extent the state (area bookstores sometimes have sections
showing books written by authors from the state).
Besides, I want to sell a fictional novel. If I'd published short
stories in magazines, that would at least establish me as a writer of
fiction, but I've had no such publication. Got a modest stack of
rejections, though -- but I don't resent those. Well, I didn't like
the form letter that said "no thanks" scrawled over it. =P
My favorite rejections were from Omni and Glimmer Train Stories. They
do it rather nicely.
> How can you be so sure you won't be able to publish
>it?
I'm not. I just accept that it might be difficult to do as a
first-time novelist. It often takes a while to get a book published,
and a writer sometimes has to go through a number of publishers before
they find one who will take it.
> Couldn't you just as easily imagine that it would be easily published?
>Or is that not realistic?
>
Oh, sure, I can *imagine* it. I like to think of Nicholas Sparks, who
sold his first novel (The Notebook?) for a million dollars. If I could
do that, I'd never work a "real job" again.
I just don't perceive it as being that easy. Besides, Sparks was a
salesperson (he sold pharmaceuticals before getting published), so
that's probably part of how he sold the publishers on his book. I'm
not much of a salesperson, although I'd certainly try.
>> I would hope that in my frustration I
>> wouldn't grumble that I'm better than Hemingway and no one will admit
>> it.
>
>It's sort of a situation where you say, "I have told the truth, this is how
>I feel, and that's all there is to it." What happens after that shouldn't be
>your problem, I think. Maybe things might change in that situation; I don't
>know.
>
Well, "the truth" and "how I feel" might not be the same thing...
>> If my work sells, it's got to be on its own merit, but it also has
>> to make it through the cracks.
>
>That would be really sweet for you if it did; I mean, I would want that, if
>it were my book, so I guess I would assume you would be happy, if that
>happened. But it's not something that has a potential for harming anything
>in any way.
Well, yeah. And sure, I would be darned happy if I published a novel
(have to finish one first, which isn't the easiest thing to do when
you already write for a living). That's all I've really ever wanted to
do, although I haven't pursued it very effectively.
Do you write? Or did you just say "if it were my book" for the sake of
conversation? Just curious.
I've noticed that you post from an .edu account. Are you a student or
do you work for a university? Again, just curious.
Laurie
Laurie S.
>In article <3a584d74....@news.spacestar.net>,
>I am not getting through to you people-so I will try one more time in a
>different way.And you will have to tsake my word on this.the Professor
>at West Virginia University CREATIVE Art Center sent me on a
>mission;being a very patriotic American,I accepted the challenge.
>
>The professor said'"There are only one or two creative artists born to
>a century.You are either one of the two or the ONLY one born in the
>20th century.Now we dont need you to sell paintings and make a lot of
>money.You have a good retirement income.We need you to get AMERICAN
>ART up into its rightful place in the world."
>
Um, the usual way to do that is to sell paintings, isn't it? Or at
least display them in gallery showings, which normally does involve
the selling of paintings.
Perhaps you prefer not to profit from your work. That's up to you, of
course, but nobility's rewards are kind of hollow when nobility turns
into martyrdom.
>I have tried everything you can name for the past 25years.If it was
>easy it would already have been done.
Tried what? From what you've said, your paintings have been displayed
in quite a few locations. That's more than a lot of non-profit artists
can say.
>I want my own museum like France
>built for Chigall in Southern France.Not necessarily built by the US
>government.I am fed up with American museums of foreign gibberish art!!
>I A national Museum of AMERICAN ART ONLY!
>
Um, you know, you're not just offering something to someone. You're
also asking someone to give something to you. Like I said earlier,
it's admirable that you're willing to give your paintings away for
this venue, but asking that someone create a *museum* for your work is
not just about giving them your paintings. What you're asking would
involve a great deal of space, and would be costly. If your name were
a household word, someone might snap up the offer, but as you've never
(AFAIK) marketed your paintings, that never happened.
They don't make museums just to showcase art that's good. They make
museums to showcase famous art that people already want to see.
>I have already been called America's Van Gogh and I am not interested
>in the job!
>
So sell a painting. I mean, when people note that Van Gogh never sold
a painting, I don't know that they think that was the mark of a "true
artist," whatever that might mean. When I learned that, I thought it
was sad, because he never got the chance to see the great fame he got
posthumously. He might have had a better life if he had.
>Texas A+M wanted my paintings;but refused to give maintainance/exhibit
>contract guarantees.
>
Well, that at least give you something to go by, no?
Can Texas A&M display 250 paintings at one time?
If your paintings are already at a university (West Virginia), why
would you be interested in another university? Is it that the West
Virginia U doesn't have the space to display the bulk of the
paintings?
>melvin3620
Laurie
Vincent Maycock
> On Sun, 07 Jan 2001 21:49:25 GMT, "Vincent Maycock"
> <maycock...@andrews.edu> wrote:
>
> >
> >"Laurie S." <lea...@spacestar.net> wrote in message
> >news:3a584d74....@news.spacestar.net...
> >
> >snip
> >
> >> I don't understand why you seek comparison of your work to that of
> >> famous artists anyway, or why you seem so bent to prove that you are
> >> better.
> >
> >Everyone wants that to some degree, I think, but some people are just
better
> >at it than others. I'm not saying that's what his problem is, but maybe
that
> >*is* an adequate explanation.
> >
> Well, maybe. I mean, sure, I can relate to the concept of feeling that
> your work is better than what you see on the open market, but what I
> don't relate to is the feeling that scads of other people are not
> noticing.
Maybe they are noticing, but they want something from the painting that it
doesn't give to them, for whatever reasons. I'm not saying that's true, but
it's something to consider.
>To me, the first feeling should be an impetus to place your
> own work on the market. Only then can the second feeling really apply,
> since if your stuff's not marketed, the scads of people don't see it.
It might be more trouble than it's worth. I suppose that's the best thing to
do, though. Also, you can't always exaggerate things like that. At the
least, my impression is that some paintings are "slightly preferable," which
wouldn't leave a whole lot of unexplained activities on the open market. Or
maybe it would? I don't know. Maybe you're right about that, but it's not
something I think about a lot.
> But Melvin isn't looking to market his work. He's looking for someone
> to provide a showplace for it -- for all of it (250 paintings, IIRC).
> That's a huge undertaking for an organization. If he were simply
> looking for gallery showings, and was getting snubbed, his beef would
> make more sense, IMO.
Maybe if he got a temporary job, it would be more realistic. Or maybe that's
just sentimental or emotional nonsense.
> >> If I ever finish my novel, I imagine that I'll not easily get
> >> it published, and that having written scores of newspaper articles and
> >> columns won't be of any help.
> >
> >Why wouldn't that help?
>
> Because newspaper articles and columns don't establish me in the
> larger community. A novel written by an unknown isn't going to sell
> any better just because the writer wrote for a local newspaper for
> years, except perhaps in the city where the writer lives, and perhaps
> to some extent the state (area bookstores sometimes have sections
> showing books written by authors from the state).
>
> Besides, I want to sell a fictional novel. If I'd published short
> stories in magazines, that would at least establish me as a writer of
> fiction, but I've had no such publication. Got a modest stack of
> rejections, though -- but I don't resent those. Well, I didn't like
> the form letter that said "no thanks" scrawled over it. =P
>
> My favorite rejections were from Omni and Glimmer Train Stories. They
> do it rather nicely.
Well, you don't really know until you try, do you? If you just sit around,
nothing is going to happen. Maybe some people like it that way, unless
something unusual happens for some reason.
> > How can you be so sure you won't be able to publish
> >it?
>
> I'm not. I just accept that it might be difficult to do as a
> first-time novelist. It often takes a while to get a book published,
> and a writer sometimes has to go through a number of publishers before
> they find one who will take it.
Or, they might decide that they just really love all of your writing a lot.
I think it's really a genuine possibility in this situation.
> > Couldn't you just as easily imagine that it would be easily published?
> >Or is that not realistic?
> >
> Oh, sure, I can *imagine* it. I like to think of Nicholas Sparks, who
> sold his first novel (The Notebook?) for a million dollars. If I could
> do that, I'd never work a "real job" again.
Right, I would hope that that's how people really react to something like
that.
> I just don't perceive it as being that easy. Besides, Sparks was a
> salesperson (he sold pharmaceuticals before getting published), so
> that's probably part of how he sold the publishers on his book. I'm
> not much of a salesperson, although I'd certainly try.
It's not easy, but I'm sure you can do it. You seem to be a capable person.
> >> I would hope that in my frustration I
> >> wouldn't grumble that I'm better than Hemingway and no one will admit
> >> it.
> >
> >It's sort of a situation where you say, "I have told the truth, this is
how
> >I feel, and that's all there is to it." What happens after that shouldn't
be
> >your problem, I think. Maybe things might change in that situation; I
don't
> >know.
> >
> Well, "the truth" and "how I feel" might not be the same thing...
Right. How you feel is important; i.e., it's extremely important to a lot of
people, but you can't confuse that with the truth, as you were saying.
> >> If my work sells, it's got to be on its own merit, but it also has
> >> to make it through the cracks.
> >
> >That would be really sweet for you if it did; I mean, I would want that,
if
> >it were my book, so I guess I would assume you would be happy, if that
> >happened. But it's not something that has a potential for harming
anything
> >in any way.
>
> Well, yeah. And sure, I would be darned happy if I published a novel
> (have to finish one first, which isn't the easiest thing to do when
> you already write for a living).
If it's what you really enjoy doing, then it might be easier.
> That's all I've really ever wanted to
> do, although I haven't pursued it very effectively.
That's a beautiful way of looking at things, at least for a writer who wants
to be published.
> Do you write? Or did you just say "if it were my book" for the sake of
> conversation? Just curious.
I have written before, although I don't think I've published anything,
really. I was just imagining myself in your shoes, there, and how good it
would be if that were to happen.
> I've noticed that you post from an .edu account. Are you a student or
> do you work for a university? Again, just curious.
I graduated in December from Andrews University with a B.S. in physics. Now,
UCF doesn't accept graduate students into their program until fall, so I'm
mostly lounging around at my Mom's place here in Florida, looking for work
until fall (and maybe I might take a few non-degree classes as well, since
that's all I can get, and even that I'm not sure about, there). But that's
really kind of you to be curious about little things like that. Did you say
you lived in Minnesota in one of your other posts? I think Minnesota is a
really romantic state, since there are a lot of forests and fields there,
although I don't think I have ever been there, in winter or otherwise.
--
Vince
melvi...@my-deja.com
"Vincent Maycock" <maycock...@andrews.edu> wrote:
>
> "Laurie S." <lea...@spacestar.net> wrote in message
> news:3a590e56...@news.spacestar.net...
> > On Sun, 07 Jan 2001 21:49:25 GMT, "Vincent Maycock"
> > <maycock...@andrews.edu> wrote:
> >
> > >
> > >"Laurie S." <lea...@spacestar.net> wrote in message
> > >news:3a584d74....@news.spacestar.net...
> > >
> > >snip
> > >
> > >> I don't understand why you seek comparison of your work to that
of
> > >> famous artists anyway, or why you seem so bent to prove that you
are
> > >> better.
> > >
> > >A DAMN PROUD HIGHLY COMPETITIVE AMERICAN!!
> > Well, maybe. I mean, sure, I can relate to the concept of feeling
that
FEELING IS NOT THE WORD.I CAN PROVE IT!BUT ART CENTERS AND EXHIBIT
MUSEUMS__The public museum in Newport News,Va after I had been in the
paper with my art in full color--on Norfolk,Va television-Director
of the public museum;told me he would never exhibit my art.Never came
to see it!But several days later put your loved Picasso garbage art by
a "CONNECTED" local woman on exhibit.I called the reporter Chuck
Bauerlien and pointed this out to him=POLITICAL!For tax dollars!
What you are defending is a cultural dictatorship! While I and my
paintings are fighting for a cultural Democracy that represents 280,
000,000 diverse people from all nations of the world!
May I ask if an artist the only one ever is voted into a university's
creative art center by professors of art with years of teaching art;wont
fight for his country to have its rightful non dictatored culture;who
will?It certainly wont be any of YOU.now will it?
melvin3620