Let Yourself Go...
Electric Nachos
is...)
The LET's allow art to fill their minds with whatever may be. As in... LET
(this image = mind manipulation).
----------
The GOTO's do not allow anything - but instead, engage themselves in a
subfunction of IF-THENs. (IF the image looks like the real thing, then GOTO
the next [image]. Else, End Interest.
----------
I will admit - there is a lot of bravery in being a LET. There is a lot of
discipline in being a GOTO. Is one ncessarily better than the other?
Mani Deli
school?
"Electric Nachos" wrote:
No skill no art!
Tired of Modern Art? check http://www3.sympatico.ca/manideli/
Mani Deli
followed as supposedly great art, he just doesn’t rank as the great
artist critics make him out to be. At his best his draftsmanship is
ordinary.
Intrestingly, it is his most realistic work which fetches the highest
prices. I believe this occurs because those richies enamored with
Picasso have gotten so used to Picasso’s brand of incompetent ugliness
that when they sense even a touch of beauty from their idol they shell
out the cash. The ordinary every day mass produced common Picasso
trash feeds the slum dweller class of the poorer rich.
Picasso’s great influence mainly inspired later generations of art
hacks to ever increasing degrees of incompetence. Even Picasso was
wary of Abstract Expressionism. The present results are twits the
likes of Twombly, Rothko and de Kooning.
His early work is nothing special. He never lived up to the talent he
is credited with as a draftsman. One need only compare it to the fine
work of the period.
Electric Nachos
Mani Deli wrote in message ...
>Although Picasso painted considerably better than most of what
>followed as supposedly great art, he just doesn’t rank as the great
>artist critics make him out to be. At his best his draftsmanship is
>ordinary.
>
>Intrestingly, it is his most realistic work which fetches the highest
>prices. I believe this occurs because those richies enamored with
>Picasso have gotten so used to Picasso’s brand of incompetent ugliness
>that when they sense even a touch of beauty from their idol they shell
>out the cash. The ordinary every day mass produced common Picasso
>trash feeds the slum dweller class of the poorer rich.
>
>Picasso’s great influence mainly inspired later generations of art
Minnie Mouse
appreciate art, eg. in galleries, or people creating art, (or possibly
ofcourse both).
The reason I ask, well, I am currently rekindling my interest in drawing and
painting; producing art in general for pleasure. But that's the problem;
I don't seem to know how to do it for pleasure. I've got all this negative
self-talk/ criticism/ pressure going on in my head eg "You've GOT to get
really good at drawing accurately if you are to be any good. You've got to
learn how to use watercolours properly. You;ve got to get reaaly good at
techniques. You're no good, what you're producing is c**p. You have had
years at art college you should be really good by now, what the hell is the
matter with you?" etc. etc.
This is what caused me to pack in trying to do any artwork.
So if I could learn to be a LET, whilst looking at art and whilst looking at
and producing my own work I'd be fine, right.....?
But how do I do that? Any ideas anyone?
Minnie x
PS. If this is the wrong newsgroup for my question then please accept my
apologies. Also if anyone knows of sites for artists, amateur or
professional, I'd be really pleased if you could pass on details. Thanks!
Electric Nachos <aint_...@chew.foo> wrote in message
news:10gg579...@corp.supernews.com...
Mani Deli
These jerks have nothing to say as usual.
(Bimbo White) wrote:
>Mani wants to FUCK Picasso, dear. Isn't it obvious?
>
He's pissed off again.
>
>
>"Electric Chair wrote:
>> Why is this MAN on your MIND so much???
>>
>> Mani Deli wrote in message ...
>> >Although Picasso painted considerably better than most of what
>> >followed as supposedly great art, he just doesn't rank as the
>> >great artist critics make him out to be. At his best his draftsmanship
>> >is ordinary.
>>
The Picassoholics here might also get of their ass and point out some
examples what you think is his great masterly draftsmanship.
Electric Nachos
Mani Deli wrote in message ...
>The Picassoholics here might also get of their ass and point out some
>examples what you think is his great masterly draftsmanship.
1. Picasso didn't need a computer to make his art.
2. Picasso didn't need to demean the works of others to qualify his.
3. Picasso explored the relationship among his mind, his hand, and the
canvas (as opposed to monkey-see monkey-do copying.)
4. Picasso over-came the fear-factor of intutition - and reliqushed control
over to something larger than his body.
5. Picasso discovered the delight and high interest in changing paradigms -
a sign of the highly intelligent and creative.
6. Picasso demonstrated high skill in realism - and bravely chose another
path.
7. Picasso recognized and emphasized the beauty in geometry and stylized
forms of other cultures.
8. Picasso (in other words) had enough respect for life to realize that art
is not exclusively defined by "Dead White Guys."
9. Picasso never had a problem with color scheme.
10. Picasso validated the surface of the painting as a legitimate point of
view.
11. Picasso introduced a new chapter in European art history book.
12. Picasso never had to beg for little kitty kat. (ALL the great ones get
laid!)
Before and if you dare to respond - understand that you are required to
address ALL points. Failing to do so will deem you the Modern Art Critic
clown - and you will have failed to chump Da Nachos.
Electric Nachos
Biljo White wrote in message <20040729081101.516$g...@newsreader.com>...
>Love,
>
>Biljo
U L-u-u-u-u-u-u-v me, freakboy?
* * * *
* * * *
* * * *
* * *
* *
* *
* *
* *
*
Jonsmind
man would get in Pablo's face, if he was alive today, and still
capable of biting back.
"Electric Nachos" <aint_...@chew.foo> wrote in message news:<10gh3en...@corp.supernews.com>...
> Why is this MAN on your MIND so much???
>
> Mani Deli wrote in message ...
> >Although Picasso painted considerably better than most of what
> >followed as supposedly great art, he just doesn芒�? rank as the great
> >artist critics make him out to be. At his best his draftsmanship is
> >ordinary.
> >
> >Intrestingly, it is his most realistic work which fetches the highest
> >prices. I believe this occurs because those richies enamored with
> >Picasso have gotten so used to Picasso芒�? brand of incompetent ugliness
> >that when they sense even a touch of beauty from their idol they shell
> >out the cash. The ordinary every day mass produced common Picasso
> >trash feeds the slum dweller class of the poorer rich.
> >
> >Picasso芒�? great influence mainly inspired later generations of art
Jonsmind
cover of your book, so that when I come across it somewhere, in a
bookstore, I can avoid it, and thus be spared of the bullshit, you
profess.
Electric Nachos
art." To imply otherwise diminishes the cunning strategies of the Modern
Artist.
Minnie Mouse wrote in message ...
sarpedon
I am currently rekindling my interest in drawing and
> painting; producing art in general for pleasure. But that's the problem;
> I don't seem to know how to do it for pleasure.
If you are rekindling an interest, then that that is the source of the
pleasure in it for you. Pursuing what you find interesting about it
will give you pleasure.
If you cannot do it for what you think pleasure should be then
continue to do it for whatever purpose your mind presented to you
originally as the reason for doing it. Otherwise, why did you get the
idea to do art and not knitting or computer programming?
You can always improve your skill by studying. You can study by
yourself from books or take classes. A great deal of art practice is
learning how to use the materials to get the effects you want.
This is the right forum for you, although only one of many. there is
also ModernArt on Yahoogroups.
But all net forums have their share of flame artists and obsessed
cranks permanently waving the banners of their "causes celebres" and
"ideees fixes."
the sarp
Mani Deli
wrote:
>He gets off, on dissing the dead.
Don't forget to remind your artzy fartzy friends here next time they
dis Bouguereau, Rockwell, Disney etc.
Mani Deli
wrote:
>Mani's 'book', like everything else about him, is a fraud. I looked for
>it. Turns out it was never published at all. If you send him money he
>emails you a copy.
>
>Gerda Ann Cerra
Correct! Now just tell us what's fraudulant about that.
Electric Nachos
Electric Nachos wrote in message <10giduf...@corp.supernews.com>...
Mani Deli
>
>Mani Deli wrote in message ...
>
>>The Picassoholics here might also get of their ass and point out some
>>examples what you think is his great masterly draftsmanship.
You haven't done that, have you? Notice all the incomprehensible
Artspeak about Picasso.
>1. Picasso didn't need a computer to make his art.
Doesn't make his work any better. He used photographs and projection
instead.
>2. Picasso didn't need to demean the works of others to qualify his.
Doesn't make his work any better.
>3. Picasso explored the relationship among his mind, his hand, and the
>canvas (as opposed to monkey-see monkey-do copying.)
Art school double talk, means nothing
>4. Picasso over-came the fear-factor of intutition - and reliqushed control
>over to something larger than his body.
What's that supposed to mean?
>5. Picasso discovered the delight and high interest in changing paradigms -
>a sign of the highly intelligent and creative.
I'm interested in painting not double talk.
>6. Picasso demonstrated high skill in realism - and bravely chose another
>path.
He had no great abilities at either.
>7. Picasso recognized and emphasized the beauty in geometry and stylized
>forms of other cultures.
Most all of Picasso's schlock output is ugly, repetitive and generally
incompetent.
>8. Picasso (in other words) had enough respect for life to realize that art
>is not exclusively defined by "Dead White Guys."
Not interested whether he had respect for life and this has nothing to
do with one's output. I suppose you also have respect for life and
your output is silch.
>9. Picasso never had a problem with color scheme.
Nor do many interior decorators, towel designers and textile artists.
Most are better at abstraction than Picasso andfar less sloppy.
>10. Picasso validated the surface of the painting as a legitimate point of
>view.
Does this guy teach the next generation of failures? He validated the
surface gee that's impressive. Now we need you to validate the
backside.
>11. Picasso introduced a new chapter in European art history book.
The bullshit section which you parrot.
>12. Picasso never had to beg for little kitty kat. (ALL the great ones get
>laid!)
That leaves you completely sexually frustrated. I'm sure getting laid
is a big deal in your values of judging artwork.
>
>Before and if you dare to respond - understand that you are required to
>address ALL points. Failing to do so will deem you the Modern Art Critic
>clown - and you will have failed to chump Da Nachos.
Hey Electric Chair, art school failure, you still haven't named some
drawing by Picasso you consider masterpieces on an achievement level
of other great artists.
I repeat my point which you quote, The Picassoholics here might also
get of their ass and point out some examples what you think is his
great masterly draftsmanship. And just tell us what you think is great
about them, in English not Artspeak.
Mani Deli
>Knew your punk ass wouldn't respond.
I was waiting for the swelling of your cerebral hemorrhoids to go down
somewhat.
Electric Nachos
Mani Deli wrote in message <4pnkg09gfumilngmf...@4ax.com>...
>, "Electric Chair" wrote:
>
>>
>>Mani Deli wrote in message ...
>>
>>>The Picassoholics here might also get of their ass and point out some
>>>examples what you think is his great masterly draftsmanship.
>
>You haven't done that, have you? Notice all the incomprehensible
>Artspeak about Picasso.
>
>>1. Picasso didn't need a computer to make his art.
>
>Doesn't make his work any better. He used photographs and projection
>instead.
LOGIC:
Picasso (computer independent) is considered a master.
You (computer dependent) are not.
A master such as Picasso is not computer dependent.
>>2. Picasso didn't need to demean the works of others to qualify his.
>
>Doesn't make his work any better.
INTERESTING artwork does not need any hype.
>>3. Picasso explored the relationship among his mind, his hand, and the
>>canvas (as opposed to monkey-see monkey-do copying.)
>
>Art school double talk, means nothing
You mean you can't understand it. If you're confused about something, learn
to ask for clarification.
>>4. Picasso over-came the fear-factor of intutition - and reliqushed
control
>>over to something larger than his body.
>
>What's that supposed to mean?
That's a good start! Realists are concerned with discipline and control over
their hand movements and thought processes. Picasso recognized that the
results of certain brushstrokes suggested shapes and light designs that did
not exist. He didn't fight to control these suggestions - instead, he let go
of the urge to control them, and instead, curiously continued to paint in
the direction that those SUGGESTIONS LED HIM.
Whether or not you agree that this is an appropriate way to develop artwork
is irrelevant. Picasso found a new train of thought (for him) to follow. It
is analogous to the free-form or brainstorming exercise in writing.
>>5. Picasso discovered the delight and high interest in changing
paradigms -
>>a sign of the highly intelligent and creative.
>
>I'm interested in painting not double talk.
You mean you can't understand it. If you're confused about something, learn
to ask for clarification. (You did it above - you can do it again!!)
>>6. Picasso demonstrated high skill in realism - and bravely chose another
>>path.
>
>He had no great abilities at either.
It is evidenced in the archives that Picasso demonstrated high skill
drawing. If you are not aware of these skills, why not ask to see them.
There is a LOT of value in asking questions!
>>7. Picasso recognized and emphasized the beauty in geometry and stylized
>>forms of other cultures.
>
>Most all of Picasso's schlock output is ugly, repetitive and generally
>incompetent.
What you mean to say is that Picasso's work doesn't appeal to you because it
isn't classical art. His competence is (also) irrelevant. He has already
proven himself and chose to create art from a different train of thought.
Not all of Picasso's work is ugly. Some of it is quite nice. SOME.
>>8. Picasso (in other words) had enough respect for life to realize that
art
>>is not exclusively defined by "Dead White Guys."
>
>Not interested whether he had respect for life and this has nothing to
>do with one's output. I suppose you also have respect for life and
>your output is silch.
Interest and respect for life have everything to do with art, you moron! I
think your computer-dependence exemplifies what happens when people like you
disregard the human essence for an electric toy.
>>9. Picasso never had a problem with color scheme.
>
>Nor do many interior decorators, towel designers and textile artists.
>Most are better at abstraction than Picasso andfar less sloppy.
Interior decorators are not abstractists - do you even know what abstract
means?? And today's towel designers and textile artists, like you, use a
computer to generate their output. Unfortunately, they are also stylishly
bland. Serious artists know that the value of repitition in design is
variation (which I'm sure is what you're calling sloppy.) There is no
variation in the designs on your mother's towels - and that's why no one
stands in awe of them.
>>10. Picasso validated the surface of the painting as a legitimate point of
>>view.
>
> Does this guy teach the next generation of failures? He validated the
>surface gee that's impressive. Now we need you to validate the
>backside.
Why? No one is looking at the backside. Although that would be a nice slant
on things. It's called CREATIVITY. Until you start thinking outside the
box - you'll always be stuck dependent on a computer, printing out
butt-awful pictures of woman's faces with WAY TOO MANY EYEBALLS.
That creativity in your art is misdirected - borderline insulting.
>>11. Picasso introduced a new chapter in European art history book.
>
>The bullshit section which you parrot.
That's not an intelligent rebuttal. Now I told you to respond - but I didn't
say to leave your brains at home. So far, I've been holding back on the
buzzer, but my finger is getting closer and closer.
>>12. Picasso never had to beg for little kitty kat. (ALL the great ones get
>>laid!)
>
>That leaves you completely sexually frustrated. I'm sure getting laid
>is a big deal in your values of judging artwork.
Anyone who is greatly admired gets lots of lovin'. A bonus of sorts. And I
never had problems in this department - In fact, I quite often had to fight
the fuckers off of me. Even today - "no - not tonight" is never completely
understood. You don't know who I am - and that gives me great pleasure.
>>Before and if you dare to respond - understand that you are required to
>>address ALL points. Failing to do so will deem you the Modern Art Critic
>>clown - and you will have failed to chump Da Nachos.
>
>Hey Electric Chair, art school failure, you still haven't named some
>drawing by Picasso you consider masterpieces on an achievement level
>of other great artists.
I'll post a link to one shortly. But it's interesting that you keep harping
on this guy when there are artists like Cezanne who were 50 times worse. Is
Picasso the only artist you're aware of? Do you have an art history book? Is
there a library in your community? Is your computer restricted to search
Picasso-Only-Keywords?
>I repeat my point which you quote, The Picassoholics here might also
>get of their ass and point out some examples what you think is his
>great masterly draftsmanship. And just tell us what you think is great
>about them, in English not Artspeak.
You mean to say, "Explain it in a way that I can understand." You don't need
to be ashamed to learn something new.
Cilantro
it is placed on the surface." There is something just primal about it.
"sarpedon" <the_...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:59b1da2d.04072...@posting.google.com...