Artist's Block
Marilyn
problem. Mine has been finishing some works which started so
enthusiastically, in an emotional high. (finish-ative)
There are two poets who write like painters, and reading their
works helps me get back into a painting and to appreciate what
I am doing.
Wallace Stevens
Denise Levertov
One of Levertov's poems is "The Composition"
(Woman at the Harpsichord, Emmanuel de Witte, 1617-1692
Musee des Beaux Art, Montreal).
in her book "Evening Train"
But it is more than this beautiful descriptive poem, it is the way
she "paints" with words, describing nature.
As usual I recommend biblio-therapy for almost everything.
Marilyn
emat...@tomatoweb.com
Wasn't "Blank Canvas" a show in Berlin?
Unfinished work. I know a lot about that. But the work is never done --
there's always something else you can do. Best to kick your works out ASAP
and get on with some more unfinished works.
Erik Mattila
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
-N.
> Unfinished work. I know a lot about that. But the work is never done --
> there's always something else you can do. Best to kick your works out ASAP
> and get on with some more unfinished works.
... or Definatively Unfinished, as Duchamp was fond of saying.
-Cheer,
-N.
--
N
To reach me, remove _xxx from my address.
peter nelson
>In article <36F3C6...@bc.ca>,
> Marilyn <m...@bc.ca> wrote:
>Unfinished work. I know a lot about that. But the work is never done --
>there's always something else you can do. Best to kick your works out ASAP
>and get on with some more unfinished works.
Ever since I switched from acrylics to oils I've had a much
bigger probem with unfinished works. I like to do fine,
detailed, realistic paintings and this often takes several
layers and a drying time of a week or two between each
layer. So often by the time a layer is dry I've started on
several more exciting projects or I've fallen out of whatever
mood or fascination got me started on the first one.
With the acrylics I would leave the painting on the easel
until it was done, and I would typically work continuously
on it over a series of evenings or days.
How do oil painters hold onto the mood or inspiration
while the work is drying? If they're doing a still-life of
fruit or flowers how do they keep them from dying/going bad?
---peter
Marilyn
For painting in general, I would say that once your enthusiasm for
the work is gone, don't belabour it and don't feel guilty about not
finishing it. Just put it away for a while, even a couple of years.
Later when you take the painting out into the light again, your
initial enthusiasm may be reborn. Or, you will look at the work in
another way, a new approach.
Somewhere I read that enthusiasm for a painting lasts 13 weeks.
If you haven't worked on it for that long, it is time to
put it away for a while.
Often, painters take out a painting that they thought wasn't
working and because they themselves have changed they look at it
with new appreciation.
Marilyn
emat...@tomatoweb.com
"peter nelson" <pne...@ultranet.com> wrote:
> emat...@tomatoweb.com wrote in message <7d3gqf$t68$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>...
> >In article <36F3C6...@bc.ca>,
> > Marilyn <m...@bc.ca> wrote:
>
> >Unfinished work. I know a lot about that. But the work is never done --
> >there's always something else you can do. Best to kick your works out ASAP
> >and get on with some more unfinished works.
>
> Ever since I switched from acrylics to oils I've had a much
> bigger probem with unfinished works. I like to do fine,
> detailed, realistic paintings and this often takes several
> layers and a drying time of a week or two between each
> layer. So often by the time a layer is dry I've started on
> several more exciting projects or I've fallen out of whatever
> mood or fascination got me started on the first one.
>
> With the acrylics I would leave the painting on the easel
> until it was done, and I would typically work continuously
> on it over a series of evenings or days.
>
> How do oil painters hold onto the mood or inspiration
> while the work is drying? If they're doing a still-life of
> fruit or flowers how do they keep them from dying/going bad?
>
> ---peter
>
discoved I could produce unfinished work at a much higher rate. Oils bothered
me because I would enevitably work the painting to death. What started out
fresh became stale with overworking. It's the seduction of the medium, I
suppose. Acrylics solved that problem, although you have to put up with the
blush of the colors.
What I hate about acrylics is that they ruin brushes. Eventually I gave up
on even cheap art brushes, and went over to the cheapest of Ace Hardware
Plastic Haft disposables, or just grabbed rags, sticks, or any means of
conveyance. (I'm really exaggerating for some reason).
Now I would like to know where Marilyn came up with that "13 week' threshold?
That sounds pretty strange to me. One of the nicest painings I ever made
just clicked, and took about three hours. Others can drag on for years.
There's no way of knowing. But almost every painting I have ever done has a
'boring' period. You develop a tactic - a plan - something obsessive like
deciding to cover every shape with hairlines of various color -- you try it
out, and it looks good - and then you have to do it all over the painting --
you're committed. After about eight or ten hours you start wondering how you
ever got tricked into such a committment. (of course I realize that not
everyone gets tricked like this).
Leigh Kimmel
emat...@tomatoweb.com writes:
> What I hate about acrylics is that they ruin brushes. Eventually I gave up
> on even cheap art brushes, and went over to the cheapest of Ace Hardware
> Plastic Haft disposables, or just grabbed rags, sticks, or any means of
> conveyance. (I'm really exaggerating for some reason).
Acrylics are harder on brushes than traditional watercolor or oils, but
I've found that they aren't that bad as long as I wash the brushes out
as completely as possible immediately after a painting session. That
said, I don't use my good sables on anything but traditional
watercolor.
--
One terrified boy, and a girl who would save him.
"Claws of Vengeance" now available, http://www.alexlit.com/
Leigh Kimmel -- writer, artist and historian
kim...@globaleyes.net
http://members.tripod.com/~kimmel/lhkwebpage.html
Ask me how to order the new Sime~Gen novel!
Check out my bookstore http://members.tripod.com/~kimmel/bookstore
peter nelson
>In article <7d5nv3$4rv$1...@antiochus.ultra.net>,
>What I hate about acrylics is that they ruin brushes. Eventually I gave up
>on even cheap art brushes, and went over to the cheapest of Ace Hardware
>Plastic Haft disposables, or just grabbed rags, sticks, or any means of
>conveyance. (I'm really exaggerating for some reason).
I haven't had this happen yet, but I also like to use my fingers for
blending and i wear disposable latex gloves (like the kind doctors
wear) and I just throw them out with each use.
>Now I would like to know where Marilyn came up with that "13 week'
threshold?
>That sounds pretty strange to me. One of the nicest painings I ever made
>just clicked, and took about three hours. Others can drag on for years.
>There's no way of knowing. But almost every painting I have ever done has
a
>'boring' period. You develop a tactic - a plan - something obsessive like
>deciding to cover every shape with hairlines of various color -- you try it
>out, and it looks good - and then you have to do it all over the
painting --
>you're committed. After about eight or ten hours you start wondering how
you
>ever got tricked into such a committment. (of course I realize that not
>everyone gets tricked like this).
Lots of my paintings and even my drawings have a "boring period" where
the original excitement or idea seems to have worn off and I have to set
it aside for awhile. I return to it when I have new enthusiasm. An added
benefit is that I often notice mistakes I made in the orginal that I didn't
notice the first time.
For my birthday my wife bought me a book to practice drawing figures
from to supplement my once or twice a week life studios, _Passion and
Line_, a book of dance photography. I have a half-finished figure study
from it in my studio now for several months while I try to figure out where
I want to to take it. All this time I've been staring at it I've noticed a
number
of minor draughtmanship or proportion errors in the original sketch that
I need to change. Luckily since this particular work is acrylic I can
fix things more easily than in oils which is a medium I've been working
in a lot lately.
---peter
peter nelson
up
>> on even cheap art brushes, and went over to the cheapest of Ace Hardware
>> Plastic Haft disposables, or just grabbed rags, sticks, or any means of
>> conveyance. (I'm really exaggerating for some reason).
>
>I've found that they aren't that bad as long as I wash the brushes out
>as completely as possible immediately after a painting session. That
>said, I don't use my good sables on anything but traditional
>watercolor.
Acrylics are very hard on natural hair brushes sich as hog's bristle and
sable. I'm not aware that they're unusually tough on synthetics as long
as you clean them thoroughly.
The solvents in oil painting are hard on the wood in the handle of
brushes. (they're also hard on your physiology - I've been using
the water-cleanable oils like Grumbacher Max and Winsor and
Newton Artisan happily so far.
---peter
Blue Moon
>What I hate about acrylics is that they ruin brushes. Eventually I gave up
>on even cheap art brushes, and went over to the cheapest of Ace Hardware
>Plastic Haft disposables, or just grabbed rags, sticks, or any means of
>conveyance. (I'm really exaggerating for some reason).
I've never had a problem with ruined brushes, except for the occasional
times when I forget to keep one wet or don't wash one out following a
painting session. Here is my working method. I have a large bucket of
water (plastic pail that holds about 1/2 gallon of water) and across
the top of that I have a thick sponge into which I've cut slots. These
slots grip and hold my working brushes which hang bristles-down in the
water. I can safely leave the brushes overnight this way if I forget
them. But I usually try to wash them out with mild soap and water at
the end of each painting session. If I do leave them overnight, most
of the paint will have dropped out of the bristles into the bottom
of the water bucket. When washing out my brushes, the final rinse is
done by running water down into the bristles from the end letting
it infiltrate into the butt or ferrule while gently kneading the
bristles between my thumb and finger.
One thing that I do is to keep my brushes segregated. I use ALL
nylon bristles for acrylic, natural bristles for oils, and of
course sables and some synthetics for watercolors. I keep my
three categories separated in containers where they are kept upright
at all times when not in use. Hanging with the bristles down would
probably be better but haven't come up with a good storage system
for hundred or more brushes that would allow me to store them all
that way.
BTW, since I teach a beginning Acrylic class, the first night
of class the students are instructed in proper care of their
brushes. Have had very few complaints from anyone who 'lost' a
brush.
emat...@tomatoweb.com
It's amazing what a keen response to brush-washing my little quip elicited.
Obviously some of sanctum sanctorium of art, eh? I've actually tried from
time to time to be as well organized as you are describing above, but I just
don't be able to sustain it, as a practice. I've developed other good studio
habits over the years successfully (by that, I mean when the act becomes
'second nature' and automatic) like always putting caps back on pens and
bottles (and screwing it closed). But washing brushes, nope, not me. I'm
terribly abusive here. That's why I like cheap brushes (the more 'dirt'
cheap the better) and 'brush substitutes.' Ritual brush washing only appeals
to me from time to time -- and its the time between that gets expensive.
Acrylics have the ability to 'set' in the heel of the brush (where the fibers
emerge from the ferrel) while you are using the brush, and it is just a matter
of time until the fibers began to spread and the brush loses its shape. Brush
hygene can extend this length of time, but I'm wondering if it can be
forestalled indefinitely. This hasn't been my experince.
BTW, no one mentioned alcohol, which is a better acrylic solvent than water.
Commerical painters use alcohol for clean-up, and it will even soften dried
acrylic copolymers. Me--I use Johnny Walker, but only for my better brushes.
But I really do like the idea of a departure from conventional art materials.
The art supply industry has a certain gestalt to it, I think, and there is an
association between 'high quality materials' and 'high quality paintings.'
But durability can be achieved in other ways. David Sequieros was very big
on using industrial paints for his murals. Not only does that solve obvious
problems about durability and cost, but it also was ideologically related to
'futurism' which was important to Mexican muralists. At any rate I do enjoy
exploring other ways of getting the material to the carrier. We have a whole
discourse about art brushes, using the shape of brushes for various reasons.
A piece of packing material, a rag, a handful of grass, a wad of paper all
lend themselves well to the ideology of the 'brushstroke.'
Marilyn
> snip
> > How do oil painters hold onto the mood or inspiration
> > while the work is drying? If they're doing a still-life of
> > fruit or flowers how do they keep them from dying/going bad?
> >
> > ---peter
> >
> I can imagine! I switched from oils to acrylics for that reason, but soon
> discoved I could produce unfinished work at a much higher rate. Oils bothered
> me because I would enevitably work the painting to death. What started out
> fresh became stale with overworking. It's the seduction of the medium, I
> suppose. Acrylics solved that problem, although you have to put up with the
> blush of the colors.
>
> on even cheap art brushes, and went over to the cheapest of Ace Hardware
> Plastic Haft disposables, or just grabbed rags, sticks, or any means of
> conveyance. (I'm really exaggerating for some reason).
>
> That sounds pretty strange to me. One of the nicest painings I ever made
> just clicked, and took about three hours. Others can drag on for years.
> There's no way of knowing. But almost every painting I have ever done has a
> 'boring' period. You develop a tactic - a plan - something obsessive like
> deciding to cover every shape with hairlines of various color -- you try it
> out, and it looks good - and then you have to do it all over the painting --
> you're committed. After about eight or ten hours you start wondering how you
> ever got tricked into such a committment. (of course I realize that not
> everyone gets tricked like this).
>
>
> -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Thirteen weeks was given as a time limit, not for the painting but for
the enthusiasm. I would just give myself a deadline. If you haven't
touched a work for 2 months, it might be time to cover it over, or
put it away so you can re-generate your enthusiasm. Needless to say,
it's not good to work on something just to finish it off, with no
enthusiasm.
One of my best paintings (acrylic) was done in 20 minutes but it took
two weeks to work up to that 20 minutes. Then again, I have finished work
on a painting after leaving it for 5 years.
Marilyn
Marilyn
>
> In article <36f7a...@oracle.zianet.com>,
> nom...@aintnonesuch.com (Blue Moon) wrote:
> > In article <7d6lpf$itq$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, emat...@tomatoweb.com says...
> >
> > >on even cheap art brushes, and went over to the cheapest of Ace Hardware
> > >Plastic Haft disposables, or just grabbed rags, sticks, or any means of
> > >conveyance. (I'm really exaggerating for some reason).
> >
>
> -----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
> http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Erik
Have you tried those little throw away sponges from the hardware store?
By the way, don't throw out those brush handles. When they xrayed
some of Picasso's sculptures they found that he used brush handles
inside the legs for support.
Marilyn
Kay Kane
Marilyn wrote in message <36F813...@bc.ca>...
>emat...@tomatoweb.com wrote:
>
>> Erik Mattila
(snip - Sorry Erik, I need the space)
>
>Thirteen weeks was given as a time limit, not for the painting but for
>the enthusiasm. I would just give myself a deadline. If you haven't
>touched a work for 2 months, it might be time to cover it over, or
>put it away so you can re-generate your enthusiasm. Needless to say,
>it's not good to work on something just to finish it off, with no
>enthusiasm.
>
>One of my best paintings (acrylic) was done in 20 minutes but it took
>two weeks to work up to that 20 minutes. Then again, I have finished work
>on a painting after leaving it for 5 years.
>
>Marilyn
Hi Marilyn,
Like you, I have no problem "starting" a painting. My works take between 3
weeks and a year to complete, so I always have several "in progress" -
usually about 7-10 paintings. One unique thing I have experienced in my own
work is that if I do a work quickly, I seem to like it less, even if it is
well-received by others. The ones I agonize over, when they present
solutions to their problems, are ones I cherish more. I use both oil and
acrylic (oils much, much more). From my own experience, whenever I complete
a work in acrylic, I always visualize it in oil and it is always superior in
oil which leads me to be somewhat angry with the work and myself for not
using oil in the first place. I never finish a work that "isn't working"
just to have a "finished" piece. I paint over it, or, as the case is today,
I destroy the canvas (I had a wonderful idea of gluing a 3-D object on a
work I was almost finished with, this usually works, today it didn't and
weeks and weeks of thought and painting are ruined!) Oh well, onward and
upward.
Kay
Blue Moon
>Acrylics have the ability to 'set' in the heel of the brush (where the fibers
>emerge from the ferrel) while you are using the brush
I've never experienced that problem and some of my favorite brushes
have seen literally years of use.
I think maybe your solution is to learn to 'paint' with a set
of painting knives. That is what I've been using of late.
Wonderful for loosening up if you are one like myself who is
hung up on detailing. No problems with cleaning or worry about
keeping painting knives wet -- if paint dries on them a scraper
will easily make them good as new.
As for using alcohol, you are absolutely right. It will loosen
dried acrylic IF you use enough to keep the dried paint continually
soaked until it softens. I don't know about its ability to clean
brushes that have dried up hard. There are commercially sold
brush cleaners that are supposed to restore brushes that have had
acrylic dry out in the bristles. They are much stronger solvents
than isopropyl or denatured alcohol though.
-N.
> emat...@tomatoweb.com wrote:
> >
> > In article <36f7a...@oracle.zianet.com>,
> > nom...@aintnonesuch.com (Blue Moon) wrote:
> > > In article <7d6lpf$itq$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, emat...@tomatoweb.com
says...
> > >
> > > >What I hate about acrylics is that they ruin brushes.
My favorite is a brush left in a bucket of water, forgotten and abandonned
in the sweep of events, and happend upon weeks later, a dried, curled foot
of a brush lightly welded to the bottom of the bucket.
I have several works in oil that are rather large and painted mainly (if
not exclusively) and paintstakingly with micro small sable water color
brushes: #1, #0, #00, etc. I burn through those sables at an astonishing
rate.
Another pleasure is with a cheap bristle brush when unexpectedly the
entire ferrule drops off and dissapears into the solvent bucket.
After years of careful and systematic innovation, I have optimized my oil
paint brush cleaning system for maximum lazyness. I have a five gallon
joint-compound type bucket filled with coffee cans full of solvent and
capped with one of those plastic 'contractor seat' lids. My brushes
dissapear out of sight into their coffee can sarcophogus, and once the lid
comes down, the entire contraption transforms itself into a chair. As life
overtakes me and my oil painting activity, the brushes are out of site and
mind. When I get around to the oils again, they have a nice layer of slime
precipitate encrustation, virtually embalmed, resting in their own gentle
pool of green slag heap or enmeshed in a perfect submerged mange pit cast
of coffee can bottom.
When I get around to cleaning them, I feel like part rescuer, part
murderer, and part discoverere....an archeologist.
Cheers,
Marilyn
For oil paint brushes, I use a mason jar, with a tight fitting lid,
fill it 3/4 with solvent &
put a plastic scrubbie in the bottom. The dirty old paint falls
under the scrubbie, and stays there. The brush gets cleaned by
pressure on the scrubbie. I never leave the brush in the solvent.
The solvent should be washed out of the brush as soon as possible,
and the brush can be put in fabric softener or hair conditioner
to restore it. This method is from a chemist at Sherwin Williams.
They were using fabric softener for bristle brushes
long before it was used for
clothes.
Cheers and keep your brushes happy.
for
emat...@tomatoweb.com
redi...@earthlink.net_xxx (-N.) wrote:
> In article <36F814...@bc.ca>, Marilyn <m...@bc.ca> wrote:
>
> > emat...@tomatoweb.com wrote:
> > >
> > > In article <36f7a...@oracle.zianet.com>,
> > > nom...@aintnonesuch.com (Blue Moon) wrote:
> > > > In article <7d6lpf$itq$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, emat...@tomatoweb.com
> says...
> > > >
> > > > >What I hate about acrylics is that they ruin brushes.
>
> My favorite is a brush left in a bucket of water, forgotten and abandonned
> in the sweep of events, and happend upon weeks later, a dried, curled foot
> of a brush lightly welded to the bottom of the bucket.
Aha, a sculpture. & brushes on end, their footlike frozen hairs having 4 inch
translucent plastic halos. Title: Angels Suffering Preoccupation.
>
> I have several works in oil that are rather large and painted mainly (if
> not exclusively) and paintstakingly with micro small sable water color
> brushes: #1, #0, #00, etc. I burn through those sables at an astonishing
> rate.
P0SSIBILITIES OF PAINTERLY RITUAL:
1. THE ALIBI: The act of applying paint in any manner seems divisible- a
painting of one huge brushstroke, or 300,000 smaller ones. Each divide
increases the artist's abilit to -- what? Is it control? I thought that,
but now I"m considering it is just a broader range, in time, to get away with
a poor decision. Each poor decision is less influencial the higher the
painting's resolution becomes. A poor decision with the one-stroke painting
is very meaningful, while a poor decision with 300,000 stroke painting is
meaningless.
2. THE CURE: On the other hand, dividing the act of painting into
infestisimally small units creates the space for pure rote, which may have
great value in psychotherapy. People who engage in a lot of rote activity,
like basketmakers or weavers have a remarkably balanced personality. Think
about where your mind goes if you are doing something that is so automatic
that it doesn't require thought. I watched Califinoria Indian basketweaver,
for example, and realized that their fingers 'thought'--while they were able
to talk about anything without interrupting the work.
>
> Another pleasure is with a cheap bristle brush when unexpectedly the
> entire ferrule drops off and dissapears into the solvent bucket.
>
> After years of careful and systematic innovation, I have optimized my oil
> paint brush cleaning system for maximum lazyness. I have a five gallon
> joint-compound type bucket filled with coffee cans full of solvent and
> capped with one of those plastic 'contractor seat' lids. My brushes
> dissapear out of sight into their coffee can sarcophogus, and once the lid
> comes down, the entire contraption transforms itself into a chair. As life
> overtakes me and my oil painting activity, the brushes are out of site and
> mind. When I get around to the oils again, they have a nice layer of slime
> precipitate encrustation, virtually embalmed, resting in their own gentle
> pool of green slag heap or enmeshed in a perfect submerged mange pit cast
> of coffee can bottom.
> When I get around to cleaning them, I feel like part rescuer, part
> murderer, and part discoverere....an archeologist.
>
> Cheers,
> -N.
>
> --
> N
> To reach me, remove _xxx from my address.
I wonder what the significance is between the two schools of brush cleaning
that is emerging from this discussion. The School of Brush Abuse and The
School of Brush Adolation. Is it like resenting your investment and
protecting your investment?
Marilyn
Brush adoration in British Columbia:
Toni Onley has a funeral service for his worn brushes
(mostly sumi)
and then buries them in the woods. This is true.
Marilyn
Blue Moon
>I wonder what the significance is between the two schools of brush cleaning
>that is emerging from this discussion. The School of Brush Abuse and The
>School of Brush Adolation. Is it like resenting your investment and
>protecting your investment?
There has also been a thread running about woodworking (stretcher bar
making). I would make a comparison between someone who is a FINE
craftsperson who keeps their tools sharpened and clean and their machines
properly lubricated etc and the person who tries to make saw cuts
with a dull, knicked blade with rust all over it and then wonders
why the cabinetry suffers. I can't imagine doing what I do in my
paintings using 'tools' that have been abused. To each his own.
-N.
> P0SSIBILITIES OF PAINTERLY RITUAL:
>
> 1. THE ALIBI: The act of applying paint in any manner seems divisible- a
> painting of one huge brushstroke, or 300,000 smaller ones. Each divide
> increases the artist's abilit to -- what? Is it control? I thought that,
> but now I"m considering it is just a broader range, in time, to get away with
> a poor decision. Each poor decision is less influencial the higher the
> painting's resolution becomes. A poor decision with the one-stroke painting
> is very meaningful, while a poor decision with 300,000 stroke painting is
> meaningless.
Not so in my experience. A poor decision in such painting (at least in my
practice) is intolerable. To compound it, the paiting has to be fluid,
alive, and complex.
If your control slips or you let down your vigilance, you generate weak
areas in the painting. These always stand out from the other 'rigorously
painted areas'. These works are about crystalline focus. Collectively,
these loosely related works take their cue and name from the first one I
did, There is no laxity allowed here. On the other hand, it is always
possible to get something outside your own intellect when your control
slips, and it may be usable and fresh.
Perhaps these works develope within the space of such mental activities.
In any case, it was a large part of their inception. Soemtimes an
autopilot in the mind goes on. I have never made paintings in which
painitng them were as laborious, dull, time consuming, quasi-monotonous
(although the paintings themselves exhibit voracious variety). The
discipline to toe the line with these works is something I have never
expereinced, not in 11 day long climbs of walls of granite.
> 2. THE CURE: On the other hand, dividing the act of painting into
> infestisimally small units creates the space for pure rote, which may have
> great value in psychotherapy. People who engage in a lot of rote activity,
> like basketmakers or weavers have a remarkably balanced personality. Think
> about where your mind goes if you are doing something that is so automatic
> that it doesn't require thought. I watched Califinoria Indian basketweaver,
> for example, and realized that their fingers 'thought'--while they were able
> to talk about anything without interrupting the work.
The above is an element in the process, although is not the entire
expereince, as there are eddys of activity that develope out of such
painting, within the painting itself, and there is also an interesting
territory around the edges of such practice. These paintings represent one
lineage of works. My ouvre is eclectic, open-ended and diverse. They all
complement one another and create a fuller exploration and artistic
practice for me, and they all inform each other in rich dialogue.
> > Another pleasure is with a cheap bristle brush when unexpectedly the
> > entire ferrule drops off and dissapears into the solvent bucket.
> >
> > After years of careful and systematic innovation, I have optimized my oil
> > paint brush cleaning system for maximum lazyness. I have a five gallon
> > joint-compound type bucket filled with coffee cans full of solvent and
> > capped with one of those plastic 'contractor seat' lids. My brushes
> > dissapear out of sight into their coffee can sarcophogus, and once the lid
> > comes down, the entire contraption transforms itself into a chair. As life
> > overtakes me and my oil painting activity, the brushes are out of site and
> > mind. When I get around to the oils again, they have a nice layer of slime
> > precipitate encrustation, virtually embalmed, resting in their own gentle
> > pool of green slag heap or enmeshed in a perfect submerged mange pit cast
> > of coffee can bottom.
> > When I get around to cleaning them, I feel like part rescuer, part
> > murderer, and part discoverere....an archeologist.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > -N.
> >
> > --
> > N
> > To reach me, remove _xxx from my address.
>
> I wonder what the significance is between the two schools of brush cleaning
> that is emerging from this discussion. The School of Brush Abuse and The
> School of Brush Adolation. Is it like resenting your investment and
> protecting your investment?
I belong to both schools. My bigger sables get worked hard, but they get
serious R&R when i message them clean again. The bristle brushes get the
same when new, but I neglect them as they age.
John deBoer
>
>>I wonder what the significance is between the two schools of brush
cleaning
>>that is emerging from this discussion. The School of Brush Abuse and The
>>School of Brush Adolation. Is it like resenting your investment and
>>protecting your investment?
I myself treat my brushes pretty badly, mostly becuz I have another class an
half hour after my painting class so I can't spend much time cleaning them
up. They start to fall apart. I use them until they do. Then I buy new
ones. This is possible becuz I still have enough money to buy brushes now
and again. Soon I will run out, and when I'm making the brushes out of my
own hair, won't I be sorry that I was so frivolous. But oh well.
I love reading other artists' discussions of brushes and building stretchers
and colors fading and all that sort of stuff. It makes me feel happy and
included, or something. I think all art should be done in the company of
others, preferably others who are working on their own art at the same time.
Twalen
Fleety
MonkeyMan
Vi...@ordinaire.com
Brush use depends a lot on the kind of painting you do. I paint in
acrylics, abstract work on canvas that does not require small or precise
marks (such as detailed realism would). I use cheap bristle brushes and a
couple of large synthetic brushes bought at a hardware store. I have used
the same brushes for years, and never replace a brush until it literally
wears out from use.
the trick: I never take the brushes out of the water. They literally
never dry out from the time I begin using them. Of course I have to
change the water periodically while I'm working, and clean the brushes when
necessary for pure color. I never use soap to clean them, just run them
under water until the water comes through clean.
When I use a brush and it still contains paint, I sometimes just stick
it in the water jar, without cleaning it first. (You push on it a little to
force the paint out before using it again!)
Works for me.
Vinny
--
-------------------- http://Wanker.Com/ --------------------
Useless for the Web
peter nelson
Blue Moon wrote in message <36fa5...@oracle.zianet.com>...
> I would make a comparison between someone who is a FINE
>craftsperson who keeps their tools sharpened and clean and their machines
>properly lubricated etc and the person who tries to make saw cuts
>with a dull, knicked blade with rust all over it and then wonders
>why the cabinetry suffers. I can't imagine doing what I do in my
>paintings using 'tools' that have been abused. To each his own.
I attended a workshop by an acrylics painter - a resident artist
at a local gallery - recently and I've never seen such brushes.
They were all within a few millimeters of the ferrule. I thought
he had cut them that way but he said no, they just wear down
that way from heavy use.
When my brushes even get SLIGHTLY worn or misshapen I
chuck them. I'd like to find some place to donate them.
---peter
peter nelson
Is this like sun block? Like if you wear it it keeps artists
away?
---peter
mdeli
>Not so in my experience. A poor decision in such painting (at least in my
>practice) is intolerable. To compound it, the paiting has to be fluid,
>alive, and complex.
And anyone who paints better remember that.
>If your control slips or you let down your vigilance, you generate weak
>areas in the painting.
"vigilance!" Yes Sir.
>These always stand out from the other 'rigorously
>painted areas'. These works are about crystalline focus. Collectively,
>these loosely related works take their cue and name from the first one I
>did, There is no laxity allowed here.
Remember "no laxity allowed!"
>On the other hand, it is always
>possible to get something outside your own intellect when your control
>slips, and it may be usable and fresh.
"Outside your own intellect." Yes Sir.
>Perhaps these works develope within the space of such mental activities.
>In any case, it was a large part of their inception. Soemtimes an
>autopilot in the mind goes on. I have never made paintings in which
>painitng them were as laborious, dull, time consuming, quasi-monotonous
>(although the paintings themselves exhibit voracious variety). The
>discipline to toe the line with these works is something I have never
>expereinced, not in 11 day long climbs of walls of granite.
Erick Matilla wrote (sorry Erik you only get the booby prize today
but do try again))
>> 2. THE CURE: On the other hand, dividing the act of painting into
>> infestisimally small units creates the space for pure rote, which may have
>> great value in psychotherapy. People who engage in a lot of rote activity,
>> like basketmakers or weavers have a remarkably balanced personality. Think
>> about where your mind goes if you are doing something that is so automatic
>> that it doesn't require thought. I watched Califinoria Indian basketweaver,
>> for example, and realized that their fingers 'thought'--while they were able
>> to talk about anything without interrupting the work.
Is that one of your theories or is that a fact?
>
>The above is an element in the process, although is not the entire
>expereince, as there are eddys of activity that develope out of such
>painting, within the painting itself, and there is also an interesting
>territory around the edges of such practice. These paintings represent one
>lineage of works. My ouvre is eclectic, open-ended and diverse.
His ouvre is "eclectic, open-ended and diverse."
> They all
>complement one another and create a fuller exploration and artistic
>practice for me, and they all inform each other in rich dialogue.
They "inform each other." By cell phone?
>
>> > Another pleasure is with a cheap bristle brush when unexpectedly the
>> > entire ferrule drops off and dissapears into the solvent bucket.
This keeps him ecstatic.
Extensive brush cleaning advice snipped.
So next time you start a painting take the above useful advice. I
wonder if -N picked up this important information in art school or its
just a product of his genius.
The score so far:
Ariane -- 2
Eric Matilla --- 1
-N ---- 1
Mani DeLi
...no skill no art
A Skeptical View of Modern Art was updated Jan.16,99
check out my new book, new work, new comments at:.
http://www.interlog.com/~hugod/
Kay Kane
Vi...@Ordinaire.com wrote in message
<19990326131024.715$g...@newsreader.com>...
>"John deBoer" <jd...@bard.edu> wrote:
>> >In article <7dbiv8$prj$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, emat...@tomatoweb.com
>> says...
>Brush use depends a lot on the kind of painting you do. I paint in
>acrylics, abstract work on canvas that does not require small or precise
>marks (such as detailed realism would). I use cheap bristle brushes and a
>couple of large synthetic brushes bought at a hardware store. I have used
>the same brushes for years, and never replace a brush until it literally
>wears out from use.
>
>the trick: I never take the brushes out of the water. They literally
>never dry out from the time I begin using them. Of course I have to
>change the water periodically while I'm working, and clean the brushes when
>necessary for pure color. I never use soap to clean them, just run them
>under water until the water comes through clean.
>
>When I use a brush and it still contains paint, I sometimes just stick
>it in the water jar, without cleaning it first. (You push on it a little to
>force the paint out before using it again!)
>
>Works for me.
>
>Vinny
>
>--
>-------------------- http://Wanker.Com/ --------------------
> Useless for the Web
Hi Vinny,
What's that "Wanker" site? I don't get it...
Your vivid brush description left me gagging and laughing. Yuck! But, I'm
kind of like that with brushes, though not as bad. I think the thrill of
purchasing new brushes motivates the abuse of the old. I assume you are
talking about acrylic? While I don't use large brushes exclusively, I have
found the joys of the hardware store brushes too (including those sponge
squeeze things).
Regards,
Kay
Vi...@ordinaire.com
> Hi Vinny,
> What's that "Wanker" site? I don't get it...
> Your vivid brush description left me gagging and laughing. Yuck! But,
> I'm kind of like that with brushes, though not as bad. I think the
> thrill of purchasing new brushes motivates the abuse of the old. I assume
> you are talking about acrylic? While I don't use large brushes
> exclusively, I have found the joys of the hardware store brushes too
> (including those sponge squeeze things).
> Regards,
> Kay
Kay -
Nice to hear from you. Yeah, I'm talking about acrylics. That tactic would
be fatal with turpentine and oils - you've pretty much gotta do the ritual
of brush cleaning at the end of the day.
I got into doing it this way because
it works fine, and takes minimal time away from painting. My brush sizes
range about 1/4" to 4". No seamless blends over here!
Best,
Vinny
(the *Wanker* site was a lame joke. Sorry.)
Larry Seiler
> For oil paint brushes, I use a mason jar, with a tight fitting lid,
> fill it 3/4 with solvent &
> put a plastic scrubbie in the bottom. The dirty old paint falls
> under the scrubbie, and stays there. The brush gets cleaned by
> pressure on the scrubbie. I never leave the brush in the solvent.
For oils.....I took a small mushroom can and punched holes in the bottom
with a larger nail. Then I turned that upside down into another
vegetable/soup can which took up about half that can. I filled this with
kerosene....because like turps this will clean the oil paint effectively,
however...it has enough petroleum in it that it is gentle on the brush
hairs. Turps will actually burn the hairs of a brush.
Of course....you don't want to clean your brush in kerosene...and then go
back to painting. After cleaning the brush out in the kerosene can...I
finish with gentle dishsoap and cool water. Warm water loosens the glue of
the metal furrel of the brush over time and the hairs will fall out.
I use a simple baggie sandwhich bag and a rubber band to close off the
kerosene can when done....and it lasts and lasts and lasts.
Larry
Larry Seiler
artist's web site at- http://cwinc.net/larryseiler
WetCanvas Artists page-
http://www.wetcanvas.com/Gallery/S/Larry_Seiler/index.html
"It is our fate and our misfortune that we live in history. An artist who
doesn't know history paints like a cow, because cows have no memory." -
Aleksandr Melamid
emat...@tomatoweb.com
nom...@aintnonesuch.com (Blue Moon) wrote:
> In article <7dbiv8$prj$1...@nnrp1.dejanews.com>, emat...@tomatoweb.com says...
>
> >that is emerging from this discussion. The School of Brush Abuse and The
> >School of Brush Adolation. Is it like resenting your investment and
> >protecting your investment?
>
> craftsperson who keeps their tools sharpened and clean and their machines
> properly lubricated etc and the person who tries to make saw cuts
> with a dull, knicked blade with rust all over it and then wonders
> why the cabinetry suffers. I can't imagine doing what I do in my
> paintings using 'tools' that have been abused. To each his own.
>
I got ahold of a huge jewelery supply catalog, and I spent several hours
calculating how much it would cost me to become a jeweler (sounded good at
the time). It was somewher around $2,500 to go first cabin -- you know,
getting those really neat machines and buffers etc. Around the same time a
friend came by who was trading in Navajo Squashblossom necklaces, and he
asked me if I wanted to drive over to Arizona with him to visit one of the
artists he was buying these really exquisite neclaces from. I jumped at the
opportunity, given my new interest in jewelery.
When we arrived, I looked around the Hogan and couldn't see anything that
resembled the shop. But just outside the door was a Juniper stump, some old
car part laying around in the dirt (an axel, a couple of piston rods, some
valve lifters with designs filed onto their face), some hunks of cuttlefish
bone blown into the sage. It was his shop. His work was exquisite -- I'm
not exaggerating (his necklaces sold for around $3500 in the big city.
Another time I visited another master who carved birds-eye maple rifle stocks
with broken coca cola bottles (oh, he also used a chaing saw). His shop was
a mess, dusty and dishevled, and he was too, covered with sawdust and wood
shavings from head to toe. As we talked, there was a long 'draw' of a maple
shave hanging from the edge of his glasses-fluttering in the breeze.
But I agree with you. I could never get anything better than marginal
joinery with poor tools. As for the brushes, this started out because I found
the acrylics were ruining by favorite brushes regardless of the precautions I
took, so I simply ceased having favorite brushes, to compensate. I just
started using throw-aways. I actually have some brushes that I have been
using for 30 years. But I've never dipped them into plastic.
emat...@tomatoweb.com
Vi...@Ordinaire.com wrote:
>
> Brush use depends a lot on the kind of painting you do. I paint in
> acrylics, abstract work on canvas that does not require small or precise
> marks (such as detailed realism would). I use cheap bristle brushes and a
> couple of large synthetic brushes bought at a hardware store. I have used
> the same brushes for years, and never replace a brush until it literally
> wears out from use.
>
> the trick: I never take the brushes out of the water. They literally
> never dry out from the time I begin using them. Of course I have to
> change the water periodically while I'm working, and clean the brushes when
> necessary for pure color. I never use soap to clean them, just run them
> under water until the water comes through clean.
>
> When I use a brush and it still contains paint, I sometimes just stick
> it in the water jar, without cleaning it first. (You push on it a little to
> force the paint out before using it again!)
>
> Works for me.
>
> Vinny
>
More or less my technology. I used to try to lather the paint out of the
heel with soap, but finally realized it was pointless. But you didn't mention
the 'goosehead' brushes that develop after sitting in the water too long.
I've actually tried these out, with not a great deal of success, but if you
hold them just right you can get a pretty interesting brush-stoke. (good for
painting upsidedown hyperbolas).
mdeli
snip
>And yes, art which outstrips its cultural context runs `the risk' of
>irrelevancy.......but then that's precisely why art is an adventure, and
>when it comes to life. This is tough to face........because then we have
>to face ourselves at that same moment. Its easier to do perhaps when
>performing musically, each instant frames the iconoclastic dream, and then
>we begin again........
There is a rumor circulating that Ariane is applying for a poetic
license from Artforum Mag.
>The score so far:
>Ariane -- 3
mdeli
>More or less my technology. I used to try to lather the paint out of the
>heel with soap, but finally realized it was pointless. But you didn't mention
>the 'goosehead' brushes that develop after sitting in the water too long.
True.
>I've actually tried these out, with not a great deal of success, but if you
>hold them just right you can get a pretty interesting brush-stoke. (good for
>painting upsidedown hyperbolas).
I hate to pass out valuable information to pinheads like Erik;
especially the sort of stuff the academics don't know.
However If you start with a new brush, dip it in glycerin and some
will enter the ferrel. Now wipe the excess dip into your paint. Again
you need to have a method of slowing the drying time which I won't go
into.
If paint gets into the ferrule wash with water until clean and repeat
the above. The idea is to keep the ferrule saturated with glycerin.
When you are finished for the day, wash and dip the brush in glycerin
before putting it to bed.
Andrew Werby
(mdeli) wrote:
If you start with a new brush, dip it in glycerin and some
> will enter the ferrel. Now wipe the excess dip into your paint. Again
> you need to have a method of slowing the drying time which I won't go
> into.
>
> If paint gets into the ferrule wash with water until clean and repeat
> the above. The idea is to keep the ferrule saturated with glycerin.
>
> When you are finished for the day, wash and dip the brush in glycerin
> before putting it to bed.
>
> Mani DeLi
> ...no skill no art
[This glycerine trick- does it work with oils, acrylics or both? I wonder
if it wouldn't degrade the paint film. Since you're talking about
extending the wet state of the paint, it sounds like you're talking about
acrylics- but can the glycerine mix with the paint, or is there a problem?]
Andrew Werby
UNITED ARTWORKS- Sculpture, Jewelry, and other art stuff
http://unitedartworks.com
http://www.computersculpture.com for 3d design tools
Vi...@ordinaire.com
<snip>
>
> More or less my technology. I used to try to lather the paint out of the
> heel with soap, but finally realized it was pointless. But you didn't
> mention the 'goosehead' brushes that develop after sitting in the water
> success, but if you hold them just right you can get a pretty interesting
> brush-stoke. (good for painting upsidedown hyperbolas).
>
For some reason I never get a *goose head* or other distortion. We're
talking about relatively small (1/2 - 2 inch) brushes, real cheapo bristle
types, right? Mine are sitting in a large plastic mug filled with tap
water. Maybe it's that my brushes are all of the blunt, squared-off type -
perhaps longer-bristled brushes would distort?
Vinny
Ariane
On Sun, 28 Mar 1999, mdeli misunderstood:
> Ariane wrote
> snip
> >And yes, art which outstrips its cultural context runs `the risk' of
> >irrelevancy.......but then that's precisely why art is an adventure, and
> >when it comes to life. This is tough to face........because then we have
> >to face ourselves at that same moment. Its easier to do perhaps when
> >performing musically, each instant frames the iconoclastic dream, and then
> >we begin again........
>
> There is a rumor circulating that Ariane is applying for a poetic
> license from Artforum Mag.
=== Bring it on!!!
> >The score so far:
> >Ariane -- 3
> >Eric Matilla --- 1
> >-N ---- 1
=== Maybe I should be trying out for the Montreal Canadiens, they're
needing a few extra points......
> Mani DeLi ...no reading skills
Kay Kane
Vi...@Ordinaire.com wrote in message
<19990328133333.460$O...@newsreader.com>...
Probably, but with the ones that require a shape - when I wash them (seldom)
I put wet brush to a bar of soap and make the shape. It drys to a perfect
shape (doesn't work with large brushes though).
Mrs. Martha Stewart
Vi...@ordinaire.com
> >For some reason I never get a *goose head* or other distortion. We're
> >talking about relatively small (1/2 - 2 inch) brushes, real cheapo
> >bristle types, right? Mine are sitting in a large plastic mug filled
> >with tap water. Maybe it's that my brushes are all of the blunt,
> >squared-off type - perhaps longer-bristled brushes would distort?
> >
> >Vinny
>
> Probably, but with the ones that require a shape - when I wash them
> (seldom) I put wet brush to a bar of soap and make the shape. It drys to
> a perfect shape (doesn't work with large brushes though).
> Mrs. Martha Stewart
Kay
It's a good thing.
Vinny
Orion713
pieces of metal that go up and have a spiral metal piece that links them.
You push the handle of the brush into the spiral, fill the cup with water and
your brushes won't get squashed on the ends.
In the metal cup is also a piece of screen to rub the brushes on to get off
extra paint.
They usually cost 5-10.00 at art supply stores.
-A
mdeli
wrote:
>In article <36fd4649...@news.interlog.com>, hug...@interlog.com
>(mdeli) wrote:
>
> If you start with a new brush, dip it in glycerin and some
>> will enter the ferrel. Now wipe the excess dip into your paint. Again
>> you need to have a method of slowing the drying time which I won't go
>> into.
>>
>> If paint gets into the ferrule wash with water until clean and repeat
>> the above. The idea is to keep the ferrule saturated with glycerin.
>>
>> When you are finished for the day, wash and dip the brush in glycerin
>> before putting it to bed.
>>
>> Mani DeLi
>> ...no skill no art
>
>[This glycerine trick- does it work with oils, acrylics or both?
I was speaking of acrylic. Try it and tell me if it works out for you.
Speaking of oil brushes I never found any problems keeping them clean.
> I wonder
>if it wouldn't degrade the paint film.
No,Glycirin reacts with the acrylic if its in small amounts. Its also
an ingerdient in some retarders
> Since you're talking about
>extending the wet state of the paint, it sounds like you're talking about
>acrylics- but can the glycerine mix with the paint, or is there a problem?]
No. Try it, and test the paint films.
Mani DeLi
...no skill no art
A Skeptical View of Modern Art was updated Jan.16,99
Andrew Werby
of my acrylic brushes as a consumable, but if I can get them to last
longer, I might upgrade to better ones.]
Andrew Werby
In article <36fecf07...@news.interlog.com>, hug...@interlog.com
(mdeli) wrote:
UNITED ARTWORKS- Sculpture, Jewelry, and other art stuff
peter nelson
Orion713 wrote in message <19990329154901...@ng126.aol.com>...
>You can buy a do-hicky called a brush washer. Mine is a metal cup with two
>pieces of metal that go up and have a spiral metal piece that links them.
>
>You push the handle of the brush into the spiral, fill the cup with water
and
>your brushes won't get squashed on the ends.
They don't get squashed in storage. They yend to get ruined by
lots of scumbling.
---peter
mdeli
>What is key in that admittedly convoluted, but nonetheless insightful,
>quotation, is that Picasso painted the feeling, the sensuousness of an
>experience rather than of an object. He got inside our experiences by
>using paint and dealing with objects.
I thought he was dealing in money.
> He therefore did not fix himself on an image, an illusion, in and of itself.
Whatever that means. O course whenever Ariiane is stumped she says it
poetry. I don't buy that. I think its baloney.
> (I'm sure you're quite aware of this...). Thus the death of illusionism which ticks off the technicians who can't make it on technique alone anymore,
Nobody makes it on technique "alone." However those who lack technique
fail at everything on technique "alone."
> Picasso changed the rules, forever (or for now anyway).
? Name three "rules."
>>The score so far:
>>Ariane -- 5
>>Eric Matilla --- 1
>>-N ---- 1
mdeli
>In one way I overstated things. There's a tradition for this: Does
>Rubens "Descent from the Cross" ask you to revere it, or isn't it
>rather directing your reverence somewhere else? Can nonbelievers
>immerse themselves enough to experience something wonderful, even to
>absorb the necessary understanding of the religious background,
>without believing? Can they start to look from this painter's
>immersion of art in natural light, form, air, space, and emotion to a
>greater love for those things around them?
Greater love indeed.
>Of course.
Haber gives himself a medal.
> But I think I was right about insisting Rothko goes
>further. He detaches the immersion from reverence entirely, just as
>he works in a tradition of alterpieces as mirrors of God and nature --
>or windows onto God and nature -- while darkening the glass. Kay has
>it right: you always had color in your life, and now what?
>
Nice Artspeak Haber. I knew you could do it.
The score so far:
Ariane --3
Eric Matilla --- 1
-N ---- 1
Haber 1
mdeli
Ariane --3
Eric Matilla --- 1
-N ---- 1
Webber--1
Raimes asked:
>>. A sublime sensibility ? can you expand ?
mark webber wrote
>Sure, I'll try... all I mean by this is that if we can agree that one
>person's decision-making process (how a work is composed, how the
>contrasts work, the shape-making, the general concern for pictorial
>unity)... their sensibility, that is - if one person's is more developed,
>more engaged, perhaps, than another person's, then we might, upon
>encountering that sensibility through their work, find it to be so unique,
>so enriching and memorable that we might see it as sublime.
>
>(I hope I'm not being too obvious. This is a sincere attempt to verbalize
>something I find a bit difficult to articulate.)
>
>Anyway, this comparison bit, it may seem rather useless or even chidish at
>times -
Sure Webber
> I understand that point of view. We don't have to always be going
>around saying "oh well, this is better than that" or "she's a better
>painter then he is."
>
>But on the other hand, I'm very much aware of the fact that my paintings
>don't just make themselves "wonderful". I have to rework them, sometimes
>make huge changes in composition or color. And there is an evaluative
>process at work here, and this process is really nourished by looking at
>art by other people this way. Judging. Developing criteria.
>
>And I don't mean theorizing. I'm not talking about content. I'm talking
>about that visual information and my visceral response to it.
>
>(And if it saves some bandwidth, I don't need it pointed out to me - by
>anyone, thanks - that this is a subjective process. I'm well aware of
>this, and find it to be a keystone of creativity. Anyone here know what
>"Objective Creativity" might be?)
>
>
>Anyway, my point here is that if I weren't a painter, it might not matter
>too much to me why I find Titian to be enormously important - much more so
>than, say, Rubens (I am well aware that I am opening myself up here for a
>direct hit, but so be it....)
>
>But Rubens decision-making - all those things I cited above as earmarks of
>sensibility, and more - it doesn't seem as, well, sublime as Titian's.
>
>Or Piero's, or Raphael's, or Corot's, Cezanne's, Caravaggio's, Watteau's,
>Michelangelo's, the painter of the fresco's in the Mystery Villa.
>
>Or Picasso and Braque's around 1912, or Matisse's or Mondrian's,
>Soutine's, or Bonnard's. Some Derain. Certainly Balthus.
>
>Those, for me, are some really sublime sensibilities - expressed
>sublimely.
>
>
>Likewise, Dekooning and Clifford Still. There are several periods where
>Dekooning is so on top of his game, so in touch with his personal language
>of shape and color that his intimacy, his fluency with paint yeilds these
>incredibly perfect expressions of, well, what beauty is, for him. And for
>me.(I'm thinking especially of the mid-70s work.)
>
>
>But Clifford Still *never* achieves anything like that for me. His work is
>so formulaic and uninventive. To me.
>
>So as much as this "comparison" game may be, well, not very democratic to
>some folks, I find it a pretty vital part of looking.
>
>
>Is this helping?
Not a bit.
>
>> >And perhaps more to the point, *why* should anyone try to produce work
>> >about someone else's concept?
>>
>> To try and produce art specific to something you have no direct
>> involvement in is a concern to me. How can, for instance, I produce art
>> about the Kosovan massacres when my only involvement is through mass
>> media ? It is an insult and it is false and *that* is shallow and forced
>> art. However, the kids who want to be *hip* through their art are
>> actually reflecting the condition they live in, wouldn't you say ? They
>> in fact personify the *postmodern condition* (as we now understand it),
>> so it is hard to then condemn their art.
>> >
>
>Well, I suppose that if what someone wants to do is make art about Kosovo,
>and they feel they can only access it through the media, then they should
>make a point about the media, and I suppose that is what a lot of art is
>"about" these days.
>
>But I generally find that, no matter what the "subject matter" is, the
>best art I see is about what the artist thinks looks best.
>
>That old "It's not what you say but how you say it" deal.
>
>>
>> Don't look at that website ... it might shatter your illusions !
>
>I did already. Nothing shattered, not at all. I couldn't see the work
>extremely well, and wouldn't want to form conclusions based on a computer
>image (there seemed to be an awful lot of blue, very electric blue, and I
>couldn't tell if that was your work or the digital process...) but I felt
>I could really relate to the direction you were/are taking. From what I
>could see, you are pretty well focused on formal concerns - personally I'm
>in favor of that.
>
>Anyway, very nice talking with you, and thanks for asking me to modify
>those thoughts. If I'm still unclear, I'm happy to try some more. That's
>really why I'm here.
>
>warmly,
>
>Mark
Bennett
Leave Corot out of this!
I checked with him.
He doesn't want to be included in your seminal seminar....
Regards....
mdeli wrote in message <3726fdcb...@news.interlog.com>...
Corot
about it every day.
Love,
Corot
Ariane
On 29 Apr 1999, Corot wrote:
> Speak for yourself, douchebag! I love abstract art! Picasso and I argue
> about it every day.
>
> Love,
>
> Corot
!!! Ahhh Camille, salut mon ami! Ca va bien? Say hi to Pablo for me will
ya? (Also Jaco Pastorius if you see him around).
Corot
Cher ami! - Je suis bien - et tu? Pablo says !Hola! and I can't find
Jaco - he's got business in the netherworld this week. Ain't technology
grand - you don't even have to be alive to contribute to art talk!!
Camille
John Haber
>ya? (Also Jaco Pastorius if you see him around).
He need pre-Impressionists for album covers? :)
John
mark webber
> Hey, Guys...
> Leave Corot out of this!
> I checked with him.
> He doesn't want to be included in your seminal seminar....
>
God, your right. Corot was much too dignified, much too wonderful a
painter to drag into all of this.
My apologies,
Mark
mark webber
> Speak for yourself, douchebag! I love abstract art! Picasso and I argue
> about it every day.
>
> Love,
>
> Corot
>
>
>
>
> "Bennett" <jc...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
> > Hey, Guys...
> > Leave Corot out of this!
> > I checked with him.
> > He doesn't want to be included in your seminal seminar....
> >
>
>
Well shit! Now we have a heavy hitter! Ladies and Gentlemen: Jean Baptiste
Camille Corot - the greatest painter of the 19th century.
Camille, thanks very much for joining us. It is a real honor. May I ask a
question?
Do you think Bouguereau is as big a sap as we think?
with the utmost respect,
Mark
John Haber
>question?
I myself want to know what he thought of that beautiful, crisp Roman
light he had once imagined so wonderfully after he shifted to the
fuzzy forest style. Or maybe I should just ask him to compare Italian
and French food.
John (on Corot: http://www.haberarts.com/preface.htm)
Glenn Geist
>On 29 Apr 1999, Corot wrote:
>
>> Speak for yourself, douchebag! I love abstract art! Picasso and I argue
>> about it every day.
>>
>> Love,
>>
>> Corot
>>
PMFJI, but I know who Corot is - the guy who uses all that green, but
who is this Du Chebag?
Glenn
>
>
John Haber
Is he related to El Kabong?
Kay Kane
>mark webber <webb...@TIGER.UOFS.EDU> wrote:
>
>>On 29 Apr 1999, Corot wrote:
>>
>>> Speak for yourself, douchebag! I love abstract art! Picasso and I argue
>>> about it every day.
>>>
>>> Love,
>>>
>>> Corot
>>>
>PMFJI, but I know who Corot is - the guy who uses all that green, but
>
Du Chebag is internationally known 2nd cousin of N. Emma.
Kay
__
To reach me remove 'rcd' from my e-mail address.
Glenn Geist
>Du Chebag is internationally known 2nd cousin of N. Emma.
>
Yes, there's a painting by him in the Louvre, titled "Summer's Eve"
Glenn Geist
>>who is this Du Chebag?
>
>Is he related to El Kabong?
I believe Le Compte Du Chebag-Vinaigrette was his father.
mark webber
Lunacy. Period.
mdeli
>Ariane --3
>Eric Matilla --- 1
>-N ---- 1
>Webber--1
Haber wrote.
>Either way, the interaction between seeing and judging is something
>one can't undertake until one's willing to put oneself at risk --
Haber puts himself at "risk."
>one's emotions, judgments, and even the bedrock of perception. And if
>there's one answer to the question of how come modern arts so damn
>good, that's it.
"That's it." Haber has figured out everything.
Bennett
I am having a dickens of a time with Mon Pere...he is in a deep funk, really
depressed and I cannot seem to get him out of it. We have painted nothing
for two days now. It seems that someone named Webber, presumptuously
assuming the counterfeit identity of "Corot", used the expression
"douchebag" in reference to another person. This caused great pain since M.
Corot would never, ever, use such an insulting term even in description,
much less, direct address. He had a hard time, in fact, choking out the
mild word "nasty" to describe Picasso.
And he was deeply puzzled by "douchebag" in the first place. I had to
explain to him what it means in American. Because in French, "douche" means
simply "shower," as in: "I think I'll grab a shower and a shave before we
eat..." When I explained what it means in American, he blanched. "Do they
know me so little," he said softly, "that they think I would speak like
that!" Believe me. He was hurt.
And he reaffirmed that Picasso was "confused," (he could not say nasty,
again.), and he said Bougeureau ("Up here, we call him "Boogie") is one of
his buddies, against whom he has no negative thoughts. He wondered in fact,
why so many seem to feel that Boogie was less of an artist because he died
true to his art, his art, for emphasis, regardless of where the world was
going.
"I always thought," said Pere, "that people who went their own way and told
the whole world to shove it -- (here, he blushed -- ) were most highly
regarded! But it seems our Boogie is an exception to that."
With that, it was time for his nap. I hope he can shake this depression. I
would like to resume my lessons.
mark webber
> Gentlemen and others...
>
> I am having a dickens of a time with Mon Pere...he is in a deep funk, really
> depressed and I cannot seem to get him out of it. We have painted nothing
> for two days now. It seems that someone named Webber, presumptuously
> assuming the counterfeit identity of "Corot", used the expression
> "douchebag" in reference to another person. This caused great pain since M.
> Corot would never, ever, use such an insulting term even in description,
> much less, direct address. He had a hard time, in fact, choking out the
> mild word "nasty" to describe Picasso.
(le snip)
Cher Monsieur Bennett,
Je suis bien sur si vous cherchez dans le dejanews vous trouvera que je
n'ai pas ecrite ces choses. Ma seul contribution etait une tres mauvais
pun avec les mots "lunacy" et "period" et c'est possible que cette pun est
vraiment tres idiomatique.
Alors, je suis desole que votre pere, le plus grand peinture dans le 19
siecle, ne peint pas pour deux jours, mais ce n'est pas ma faut.
Bon chance!
Mark Webber
P.S. Ariane, Marilyn? How was my French? I'm getting rusty I'm sure, but
wanted to show respect to Monsieur Corot and his son by writing in their
tongue.
John Haber
(But then I've had this argument with Mark and Dik over B.'s quality
in my eyes.)
-- Fra Gonad
Glenn Geist
>A Skeptical View of Modern Art was updated Jan.16,99
>check out my new book, new work, new comments at:.
> http://www.interlog.com/~hugod/
That's it - Mani has figured out everything - everything is crap -
Mani is a genius - all hail the Buffoon
What about one bloody example of what you think is worthwhile?
What is it you like, other than yourself? Are you afraid?
Glenn
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
Today he shall be lifted up and tomorrow he shall not be found,
because he is returned into his dust and his thought has come to
nothing. -I Macabees 2:63-
\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
Ariane
On Tue, 4 May 1999, mark webber wrote:
> (le snip)
>
> Cher Monsieur Bennett,
>
> Je suis bien sur si vous cherchez dans le dejanews vous trouvera que je
> n'ai pas ecrite ces choses. Ma seul contribution etait une tres mauvais
> pun avec les mots "lunacy" et "period" et c'est possible que cette pun est
> vraiment tres idiomatique.
>
> Alors, je suis desole que votre pere, le plus grand peinture dans le 19
> siecle, ne peint pas pour deux jours, mais ce n'est pas ma faut.
>
> Bon chance!
>
> Mark Webber
>
>
>
> P.S. Ariane, Marilyn? How was my French? I'm getting rusty I'm sure, but
> wanted to show respect to Monsieur Corot and his son by writing in their
> tongue.
=== Formidable (pour un anglais!), magnifique....felicitations! Mais ce
n'est pas ton francais qui m'inquiete a ce moment, c'est que tu as oublier
Delacroix! Le plus grand peintre de la dernier siecle! En tous cas,
continue avec ton francais.....felicitations encore.
a la prochaine,
A.
Bennett
He looks askance at your linguistic gymnastics, and sniffs at your
pronunciation....
Good heavens, he certainly is French!!!
But he does seem to be getting back to his old self....
Marilyn
Formidable, bien oui !!
I thought it was Ariane writing at first (I'm an anglais after all,
kicked out of Quebec for not being perfectly bilingual).
But forgetting Delacroix? I'm not sure but I think he
has been declared unskilled by several posters here.
Since then, of course my opinion of his work has sunk
to the basement, no sub-basement.
au revoir,
M.
A.A. Raimes
, Ariane <da_l...@alcor.concordia.ca> writes
>
>=== Formidable (pour un anglais!)
s'il te plait, mon amie Ariane - Marc n'est pas anglais - il est
american ! vraiment !
Ariane
On Tue, 4 May 1999, Marilyn wrote:
> Ariane wrote:
> > === Formidable (pour un anglais!), magnifique....felicitations! Mais ce
> > n'est pas ton francais qui m'inquiete a ce moment, c'est que tu as oublier
> > Delacroix! Le plus grand peintre de la dernier siecle! En tous cas,
> > continue avec ton francais.....felicitations encore.
> >
> > a la prochaine,
> >
> > A.
>
> Formidable, bien oui !!
> I thought it was Ariane writing at first (I'm an anglais after all,
> kicked out of Quebec for not being perfectly bilingual).
!! LOL
No one has ever been kicked out of Quebec, but there are a lot of
noisy, nasty language groups here who can't simply accept that Quebec is a
majority French province, and therefore they become victims of their
belligerent attitudes.....Solution: learn french and english, and treat
people with respect.....
a bientot,
A.
mark webber
> === Formidable (pour un anglais!), magnifique....felicitations! Mais ce
> n'est pas ton francais qui m'inquiete a ce moment, c'est que tu as oublier
> Delacroix! Le plus grand peintre de la dernier siecle! En tous cas,
> continue avec ton francais.....felicitations encore.
>
> a la prochaine,
>
> A.
Merci, et vous avez raison - Delacroix etait magnifique aussi.
merci encore,
Mark
mark webber
This is good news, thanks for the update!
mark webber
>
> Formidable, bien oui !!
> I thought it was Ariane writing at first (I'm an anglais after all,
> kicked out of Quebec for not being perfectly bilingual).
> But forgetting Delacroix? I'm not sure but I think he
> has been declared unskilled by several posters here.
> Since then, of course my opinion of his work has sunk
> to the basement, no sub-basement.
It wasn't very complex sentence structure, but I'm pleased to have
communicated without too many errors.
Let's not worry for Delacroix, Corot, Jackson, Pablo or any of the artists
we love. They survive just fine without our defense. Our defense cetainly
isn't neccessary. It simply isn't worth the effort trying to turn idiots
into seeing, thinking, feeling folks.
Instead I propose we gush continuously about the art we find terrific.
Much more effective.
Mark
mark webber
> It's good you have respect. Yes, Bouguereau was an even bigger
> sap than you guys could possibly imagine. Silly, sentimental
> canvases targeted to the rich and vacuous, nudes calculated to
> titillate, etc. But the lad could market!
> We have a contest up here about once a month -
> the winner gets to kick Bouguereau's ass. Recent winners are
> Pollack and Rothko, with Greenberg as referee (sorta like your
> wrestling referees in effectiveness - some things never change).
>
> Love,
>
> Corot
I always knew I'd like you, monsieur. You rock.
Does anybody ever get to kick Greenberg's ass? Or does everyone realize it
is more of what he wants, that is, attention?
your student always,
Mark
Marilyn
>
> On Tue, 4 May 1999, Marilyn wrote:
>
>
> > > === Formidable (pour un anglais!), magnifique....felicitations! Mais ce
> > > n'est pas ton francais qui m'inquiete a ce moment, c'est que tu as oublier
> > > Delacroix! Le plus grand peintre de la dernier siecle! En tous cas,
> > > continue avec ton francais.....felicitations encore.
> > >
> > > a la prochaine,
> > >
> > > A.
> >
> > I thought it was Ariane writing at first (I'm an anglais after all,
> > kicked out of Quebec for not being perfectly bilingual).
>
>
> No one has ever been kicked out of Quebec, but there are a lot of
> noisy, nasty language groups here who can't simply accept that Quebec is a
> majority French province, and therefore they become victims of their
> belligerent attitudes.....Solution: learn french and english, and treat
> people with respect.....
>
> a bientot,
>
> A.
Exactement correct, no one has ever been kicked out of Quebec.
I was actually blasted out by the cold wintry winds.
regards,
Marilyn
whose children attended French Immersion School.
Marilyn
>
> On Tue, 4 May 1999, Marilyn wrote:
>
> >
> > Formidable, bien oui !!
> > I thought it was Ariane writing at first (I'm an anglais after all,
> > kicked out of Quebec for not being perfectly bilingual).
> > has been declared unskilled by several posters here.
> > Since then, of course my opinion of his work has sunk
> > to the basement, no sub-basement.
>
> It wasn't very complex sentence structure, but I'm pleased to have
> communicated without too many errors.
>
> Let's not worry for Delacroix, Corot, Jackson, Pablo or any of the artists
> we love. They survive just fine without our defense. Our defense cetainly
> isn't neccessary. It simply isn't worth the effort trying to turn idiots
> into seeing, thinking, feeling folks.
>
> Instead I propose we gush continuously about the art we find terrific.
> Much more effective.
>
> Mark
Oh Gush!
I still
love
Clyfford!
M.
Corot
To tell you the truth, bubbie, my eyesight went out on me.
It's French food - no contest.
Camille Corot
> I myself want to know what he thought of that beautiful, crisp Roman
> light he had once imagined so wonderfully after he shifted to the
> fuzzy forest style. Or maybe I should just ask him to compare Italian
> and French food.
>
> John (on Corot: http://www.haberarts.com/preface.htm)
--
Linda Thomas
*Time is never wasted when you're wasted all the time.
--Catherine Zandonella*
Corot
sap than you guys could possibly imagine. Silly, sentimental
canvases targeted to the rich and vacuous, nudes calculated to
titillate, etc. But the lad could market!
We have a contest up here about once a month -
the winner gets to kick Bouguereau's ass. Recent winners are
Pollack and Rothko, with Greenberg as referee (sorta like your
wrestling referees in effectiveness - some things never change).
Love,
Corot
> >
> > "Bennett" <jc...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>
> Well shit! Now we have a heavy hitter! Ladies and Gentlemen: Jean
> Baptiste Camille Corot - the greatest painter of the 19th century.
>
> Camille, thanks very much for joining us. It is a real honor. May I ask a
> question?
>
mark webber
There you go! right on!
mdeli
success based on my Abstract Expressionist technical experience. Let
this serve for all artists trying to win the Modern Art lottery.
Remember that technically speaking Minimal Gigantism is now the
favored style of museums and richies. It makes them feel like they
are getting something for the price tag. Anything really successful
today has to out-big its competitor and at the same time have that
minimal put-on look.
Note the following technical instruction is for schmier type modernism
only. The large stripe variety of Modern Art (always call these color
fields or artzy fartzies won't understand what you are talking about)
is not covered here because using tape and paint rollers is obvious to
anyone who isn't a complete idiot.(variants on this can be found at
you local auto body shop)
Very large canvases are indeed a major expense but an absolute
requirement for all Modern Art aspirants wanting to impress those in
power. The norm for this AE style is buckets of cheap wall paint. Of
course this is a sure guarantee that your work will fall apart rather
sooner than later, but that too is in the AE tradition and helps keep
our best restorers busy.
Now you may ask how did Kline, Rothko and all those more minor
schmierers get those broad strokes? Well here's the secret. Its done
by joining House painter's brushes together in parallel. I've seen
this done in many ways, sloppy and cleaver. The best way is to use
metal mending plates or wood stripping. Five even ten brushes can thus
be joined side to side to make an instrument of immense size.
There are also several tricks to properly charging the brushes. One
way is to paint the large brush ends with smaller brushes dipped into
different colors. Multi charged brushes are one of the big secrets of
AE schmierers. Another way is to uses plastic lined V-shaped troughs.
Pour in different color paints and dip your monster brush. It is good
to have a spare wall to take off the excess paint off before hitting
the canvas.
A few quick schmiers will usually do. Check out Franz Kline, Still,
Motherwell and the usual lesser-known clap-trap at your local museum
for inspiration. If you get yourself cleverly it should leave you
lots of time to make connections or get as drunk as many real AE
successes.
Remember that the most successful Post-Greenbergian Gigantism requires
immense amounts of wall space, and also possess an anemic lack of
spatial content. Only then will your works give the feel of a tribe of
anorexic giants all suffering from similar hormone symptoms.
If this trend continues, newer works will eventually require museum
galleries that approach the size of zeppelin hangers and require
venture capital in order to invest in the materials necessary to get
started.
Mani DeLi
...no skill no art
A Skeptical View of Modern Art was updated Jan.16,99
mdeli
Ariane --4
Eric Matilla --- 1
-N ---- 1
Haber--2
Webber--1
Ariane wrote:
>=== Just to clarify, it is not a question of whether `this' or `that' is
>beautiful (in an Aristotelian sense). Neither was I referring to some
>ultra abstract ideal form `BEAUTY' from which we derive our particular
>sensations on things (in a Platonic sense). No, my point was simply that,
>our subjective impressions inhere in the universe. They are facts as much
>as anything else is. Beauty exists by virtue of this, as does love,
>hatred, revenge, desire, maternity, and spite. Initially, I was
>responding to someone who claimed that beauty is not an inherent property
>of the universe. I think that it is relatively easy to show, through
>analytic logic, that beauty inheres in the universe as a `fact' among
>countless others.....
Analytic logic," indeed.
>
>To me, what we find beautiful is besides the point. That we, as a
>species, can find things beautiful at all is the point. This brings to
>bear on the inherent `structure' or properties of the universe.
Analytical physics at last.
mdeli
>It's good you have respect. Yes, Bouguereau was an even bigger
>sap than you guys could possibly imagine. Silly, sentimental
>canvases targeted to the rich and vacuous, nudes calculated to
>titillate, etc.
Did all that Titilation make you come in your panties?
> But the lad could market!
We'll have none of that. Money-bad bad.
>We have a contest up here about once a month -
>the winner gets to kick Bouguereau's ass. Recent winners are
>Pollack and Rothko, with Greenberg as referee (sorta like your
>wrestling referees in effectiveness - some things never change).
>
The ass is in her closet. Somewhat smaller than her's.
bmah...@niu.edu
are doing.
--
Ben Mahmoud
bmah...@niu.edu
http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~benm
mdeli <hug...@interlog.com> wrote in message
news:372f0715...@news.interlog.com...
A.A. Raimes
>Your bitterness and anger add a curious zest to this performance piece you
>are doing.
>
>--
>
>Ben Mahmoud
>bmah...@niu.edu
That was a kind way of telling the poor old chap what a narrow minded,
twerp he is - we, as a group, really ought to be more kind to him -
can't you all tell how sad and lonely he is ? On alt.philosophy.debate
we have Neo Nazi who splurts off sections of Mein whatsitcalled every so
often - poor dear - I chuck him a bone everytime he starts, which seems
to shut him up - maybe we could try that here ? Alternatively do what I
have done and set your browser not to pick up anymore *mani* ... a
*dead* mani is a peaceful one... and there is immense pleasure in just
seeing three crosses against his name instead of having to read him !
Good to see your name here Ben - lucky you spoke out, I was just about
to cite your work with someone in a discussion without asking your
permission ! Hope you didn't tell too many you were defecting from AC ?
I would hate some of them to follow ;-) What a thought ! Still at least
on a newsgroup you can *kill* them - difficult to do that on a list.
Cheers.
Alison A Raimes
ali...@raimes.demon.co.uk
http://www.raimes.demon.co.uk
9th - 23rd May 1999 @ Peterbourough Arthouse
26, Fitzwilliam Street. Peterborough
Tel: 01733 319581 (for gallery opening hours)
Corot
to throw le comments pornographique at my humble person.
hug...@interlog.com (mdeli) wrote:
> On 5 May 1999 01:40:42 GMT, Co...@Heaven.com(Corot) wrote:
>
> >It's good you have respect. Yes, Bouguereau was an even bigger
> >sap than you guys could possibly imagine. Silly, sentimental
> >canvases targeted to the rich and vacuous, nudes calculated to
> >titillate, etc.
>
> Did all that Titilation make you come in your panties?
It is my guess that I have *come,* as you say so cleverly, in the last
month of my life on earth, more times than perhaps you have in the last
ten years, Mr. Deli. With another person, that is. Coming by ones self does
not count to a Frenchman! Pah! I spit on it! (Oh - bad choice of le English
words. I mean, I despise the abominable practice.)
My advice, cher ami, is to find an amiable woman (or man, as the preference
may be), and get some amor physicale, as we say. On my honor, it will
improve your disposition and lengthen your life.
>
> > But the lad could market!
>
> We'll have none of that. Money-bad bad.
Ah, the amusing baby talk. I can assure you, monsieur, that we all have
sold art for money. It is an agreeable way to pay le rent. I remind you
that an artist becomes commerciale only when he (or she - I am now so
moderne!) paints solely with money in the mind - like your Norman Rockwell
or Leroy Neiman. (Norman is un chat cool, you know. He beats me
consistently at Parcheesi and swaps tall tales with N. C. Wyeth.)
>
> >We have a contest up here about once a month -
> >the winner gets to kick Bouguereau's ass. Recent winners are
> >Pollack and Rothko, with Greenberg as referee (sorta like your
> >wrestling referees in effectiveness - some things never change).
> >
> The ass is in her closet. Somewhat smaller than her's.
I am not understanding this. Probably my English is not enough
sophisticated.
> Mani DeLi
> ...no skill no art
This preoccupation with skill! As though it were the main thing. The main
thing is .... is... [loosing connection] ..........
There. Now you know what it is.
Love,
Corot
Glenn Geist
>Your bitterness and anger add a curious zest to this performance piece you
>are doing.
>
I had not thought of it as art, but I think you're right. This
torquemada of taste is his magnum opus. I shall have to regard it
with more respect.
Now if it were based on actual observation rather than dreams. . . .
Glenn
John Haber
(p.s. even you for once get to have a typo intrude upon your French
grammar in complimenting Mark's <grin>)
John
>[A M.W.:] Mais ce n'est pas ton francais qui m'inquiete a ce moment,
mdeli
for inspiration. If you get yourself cleverly set up it should leave
you lots of time to make connections or get as drunk as many real AE
successes.
Remember that the most successful Post-Greenbergian Gigantism requires
immense amounts of wall space, and also possess an anemic lack of
spatial content. Only then will your works give the feel of a tribe of
anorexic giants all suffering from similar hormone symptoms.
If this trend continues, newer works will eventually require museum
galleries that approach the size of zeppelin hangers and require
venture capital in order to invest in the materials necessary to get
started.
Mani DeLi
...no skill no art
A Skeptical View of Modern Art was updated Jan.16,99
mdeli
>Your bitterness and anger add a curious zest to this performance piece you
>are doing.
>
The bitterness and anger is strictly your's, Why not tell us that my
technical information is wrong. I suspect it isn't.
>
>Ben Mahmoud
>bmah...@niu.edu
>http://sun.soci.niu.edu/~benm
>mdeli <hug...@interlog.com> wrote in message
>news:372f0715...@news.interlog.com...
>> for inspiration. If you get yourself cleverly it should leave you
mdeli
>In article <7gr1cl$7p0$1...@husk.cso.niu.edu>, bmah...@niu.edu writes
>>Your bitterness and anger add a curious zest to this performance piece you
>>are doing.
>>
>>--
>>
>>Ben Mahmoud
>>bmah...@niu.edu
>
>That was a kind way of telling the poor old chap what a narrow minded,
>twerp he is - we, as a group, really ought to be more kind to him -
>can't you all tell how sad and lonely he is ?
The only reason you say this is because your monotonous technique
can't match the one I described. Take a loan and buy some of the
necessary equipment. I'm sure it will get you further than your boring
imitation marblized nothings.
> On alt.philosophy.debate
>we have Neo Nazi who splurts off sections of Mein whatsitcalled every so
>often - poor dear - I chuck him a bone everytime he starts, which seems
>to shut him up - maybe we could try that here ?
Do try it. A bone is the best your artwork deserves.
> Alternatively do what I
>have done and set your browser not to pick up anymore *mani* ... a
>*dead* mani is a peaceful one... and there is immense pleasure in just
>seeing three crosses against his name instead of having to read him !
Sure. However it seems that you do read my messages. I guess its your
curiosity and the fact that you're getting bored by your ass kissing
compatriots.
You sound like Webber who in every fourth article, mentions that he
won't read any more messages that upset him. I suspect he reads them
all and then feels guilty.
mdeli
wrote:
><bmah...@niu.edu> wrote:
>
>>Your bitterness and anger add a curious zest to this performance piece you
>>are doing.
>>
>I had not thought of it as art, but I think you're right. This
>torquemada of taste is his magnum opus. I shall have to regard it
>with more respect.
>
>Now if it were based on actual observation rather than dreams. . . .
>
>Glenn
>
I lived in NYC for 40 years and I suspect I knew more schmierers than
paintings you own.
If you think the technique is a dream youv'e been had. Buy yourself
some of the stuff I mention and try it. The results may astound you.
You sound like you can afford it.
And before your paintings start falling apart, get yourself a vanity
gallery to show them. You might even get the rave reviews Webber,
Marilyn and Allison are still waiting for.
Calinda
I think I'm starting to get it. You've said in other posts that you hung
around the Cedar Bar with the AbEx crowd, knew Rothko, Greenberg, etc., and
that you lived in New York for 40 years.
The other artists made it big. You did not, and you've never
forgiven them for stealing the fame and money that should've been
yours. Now you're old and in the way, and the only thing you can do is
post venom and toilet jokes in an internet group that is open to anybody.
That's it right there.
Mani Deli = *idle hands* -- why don't you use one of your idle hands to
jerk off onto a canvas? It would be better art than the crap you show at
your site. Or can't you get it up any more?
Calinda
> for inspiration. If you get yourself cleverly set up it should leave
> you lots of time to make connections or get as drunk as many real AE
> successes.
>
> Remember that the most successful Post-Greenbergian Gigantism requires
> immense amounts of wall space, and also possess an anemic lack of
> spatial content. Only then will your works give the feel of a tribe of
> anorexic giants all suffering from similar hormone symptoms.
>
> If this trend continues, newer works will eventually require museum
> galleries that approach the size of zeppelin hangers and require
> venture capital in order to invest in the materials necessary to get
> started.
>
G*rd*n
| Hi, Hugo -
|
| I think I'm starting to get it. You've said in other posts that you hung
| around the Cedar Bar with the AbEx crowd, knew Rothko, Greenberg, etc., and
| that you lived in New York for 40 years.
|
| The other artists made it big. You did not, and you've never
| forgiven them for stealing the fame and money that should've been
| yours. Now you're old and in the way, and the only thing you can do is
| post venom and toilet jokes in an internet group that is open to anybody.
| That's it right there.
|
| Mani Deli = *idle hands* -- why don't you use one of your idle hands to
| jerk off onto a canvas? It would be better art than the crap you show at
| your site. Or can't you get it up any more?
Why jerk off on the canvas when everyone else is jerking off
on the Net? But I digress.
What I'm waiting for is for Mani to catch up with the Soho
Style. He's still back doing the '60s, I believe. I won't
say there's no abex in Soho, but believe me, it's well
under control. But the bejeweled plastic snow-shovels
wrapped in neon -- someone's got to something about _them_,
and soon.
--
}"{ G*rd*n }"{ g...@panix.com }"{
{ http://www.etaoin.com | latest new material 4/15 <-adv't
Charles Eicher
>
>Here is some technical help for those aspiring to Modern Academic
>success based on my Abstract Expressionist technical experience. Let
>this serve for all artists trying to win the Modern Art lottery.
ya know, sometimes mani is so egregiously stupid and incorrect, I wonder if he
has EVER painted on canvas. For example:
>Now you may ask how did Kline, Rothko and all those more minor
>schmierers get those broad strokes? Well here's the secret. Its done
>by joining House painter's brushes together in parallel. I've seen
>this done in many ways, sloppy and cleaver. The best way is to use
>metal mending plates or wood stripping. Five even ten brushes can thus
>be joined side to side to make an instrument of immense size.
The way you get broad brushstrokes is to lay down one brushstroke, and then lay
down another one NEXT to it. Paint has this mysterious quality, if you lay down
two overlapping strokes of wet pigment, they form a single surface when dry.
If you ever actually bothered to LOOK at a deKooning or Kline, you would clearly
see those broad strokes are composed of smaller width strokes. Of course, they
also used larger brushes, and deKooning said he sometimes painted with a mop
(but he was apparently joking). But none of them used your stupid housepainter
tricks.
>There are also several tricks to properly charging the brushes. One
>way is to paint the large brush ends with smaller brushes dipped into
>different colors. Multi charged brushes are one of the big secrets of
>AE schmierers.
That technique is a common "secret" used by ukiyo-e painters in Japan for about
the last 5 or 600 years. But it isn't done by "painting" the tip of a brush with
another color. It is done by carefully loading the brush with the first color,
squeezing some excess from the tip only, then redipping in another color.
Skilled painters can even get 3 or 4 colors on one brush, and paint amazingly
smooth gradations.
However, a skilled alla-prima painter can easily work with two colors on their
brush, in a wider variety of methods than the "double-dipped" brush allows.
Maybe you would have learned this technique if you hadn't dropped out of art
school.
I would suggest that you refrain from dispensing such ignorant "advice,"
particularly since it undermines your whole "no skill" theme.
Leigh Kimmel
Charles Eicher <cei...@inav.net> writes:
> Of course, they
> also used larger brushes, and deKooning said he sometimes painted with a mop
> (but he was apparently joking).
That makes me think of a caricature of JMW Turner swabbing at a canvas
with a mop loaded with yellow paint from a pail. I wonder if deKooning
was thinking of that when he made the comment.
I have a furry (anthropomorphic animal) parody of the Turner caricature
on my webpage at
http://www.geocities.com/SoHo/Gallery/9989/turnerfurry.html
--
Can't wait for "The Phantom Menace" to come out? Relive the wonder of
the
original movies.
http://members.tripod.com/~kimmel/bookstore/starwarstrilogy.html
Leigh Kimmel -- writer, artist and historian
kim...@globaleyes.net
http://members.tripod.com/~kimmel/lhkwebpage.html
Ask me how to order the new Sime~Gen novel!
Check out my bookstore http://members.tripod.com/~kimmel/bookstore/
A.A. Raimes
<Cal...@Vidanet.com> writes in response to *bitterly disappointed with
life* the now deceased in my browser, mani
>I think I'm starting to get it. You've said in other posts that you hung
>around the Cedar Bar with the AbEx crowd, knew Rothko, Greenberg, etc., and
>that you lived in New York for 40 years.
Rothko didn't drink at the Cedar Bar - I asked someone who did drink
there.
Glenn Geist
Just wanted to thank you for that bit - I've recently become
interested in ukiyo-e and the books I've looked at don't treat
technique at all. Very interesting - and refreshing to hear someone
say something useful in here.
Glenn
Glenn Geist
Now you're being sooo mean, I'm going to start to feel sorry for him
<s> And whatever you do, don't let him know that nobody is doing the
kind of painting he's talking about any more. He'll have to learn a
whole new vaudeville routine ( and don't tell him *that's dead either)
Glenn
>Hi, Hugo -
>
>I think I'm starting to get it. You've said in other posts that you hung
>around the Cedar Bar with the AbEx crowd, knew Rothko, Greenberg, etc., and
>that you lived in New York for 40 years.
>
>The other artists made it big. You did not, and you've never
>forgiven them for stealing the fame and money that should've been
>yours. Now you're old and in the way, and the only thing you can do is
>post venom and toilet jokes in an internet group that is open to anybody.
>That's it right there.
>
>Mani Deli = *idle hands* -- why don't you use one of your idle hands to
>jerk off onto a canvas? It would be better art than the crap you show at
>your site. Or can't you get it up any more?
>
>Calinda
>
>
>
>
>hug...@interlog.com (mdeli) wrote:
>> Here is some technical help for those aspiring to Modern Academic
>> success based on my Abstract Expressionist technical experience. Let
>> this serve for all artists trying to win the Modern Art lottery.
>>
>> Remember that technically speaking Minimal Gigantism is now the
>> favored style of museums and richies. It makes them feel like they
>> are getting something for the price tag. Anything really successful
>> today has to out-big its competitor and at the same time have that
>> minimal put-on look.
>>
>> Note the following technical instruction is for schmier type modernism
>> only. The large stripe variety of Modern Art (always call these color
>> fields or artzy fartzies won't understand what you are talking about)
>> is not covered here because using tape and paint rollers is obvious to
>> anyone who isn't a complete idiot.(variants on this can be found at
>> you local auto body shop)
>>
>> Very large canvases are indeed a major expense but an absolute
>> requirement for all Modern Art aspirants wanting to impress those in
>> power. The norm for this AE style is buckets of cheap wall paint. Of
>> course this is a sure guarantee that your work will fall apart rather
>> sooner than later, but that too is in the AE tradition and helps keep
>> our best restorers busy.
>>
>> Now you may ask how did Kline, Rothko and all those more minor
>> schmierers get those broad strokes? Well here's the secret. Its done
>> by joining House painter's brushes together in parallel. I've seen
>> this done in many ways, sloppy and cleaver. The best way is to use
>> metal mending plates or wood stripping. Five even ten brushes can thus
>> be joined side to side to make an instrument of immense size.
>>
>> There are also several tricks to properly charging the brushes. One
>> way is to paint the large brush ends with smaller brushes dipped into
>> different colors. Multi charged brushes are one of the big secrets of
Glenn Geist
>I lived in NYC for 40 years and I suspect I knew more schmierers than
>paintings you own.
Joe Gould lived in New York for longer than that and he was a fraud .
>
> If you think the technique is a dream youv'e been had. Buy yourself
>some of the stuff I mention and try it. The results may astound you.
>You sound like you can afford it.
I can just afford paint brushes, but if I bouy them I will be reminded
the house needs painting.
I I'm not talking about the technique, But none the less, it's
probably possible to reproduce lots of things - Mondrian for example.
Only problem is, that skill isn't what counts. If I could reproduce a
Rembrandt, it still wouldn't be enough to make me an artist and it
wouldn't be art and it wouldn't be Rembrandt.
>And before your paintings start falling apart, get yourself a vanity
>gallery to show them. You might even get the rave reviews Webber,
>Marilyn and Allison are still waiting for.
>
I recall that some important Da Vinci frescos fell apart too
But rave reviews? I'm not an artist and I do my own raving.
Glenn
No skillet, no fries
Glenn Geist
>Sure. However it seems that you do read my messages. I guess its your
>curiosity and the fact that you're getting bored by your ass kissing
>compatriots.
>
Hey, I thought it was *my ass you were interested in. I can't let you
out of my sight, can I?
Glenn
Mani di fanni
Charles Eicher
>
>Charles Eicher <cei...@inav.net> wrote:
>
>Just wanted to thank you for that bit - I've recently become
>interested in ukiyo-e and the books I've looked at don't treat
>technique at all. Very interesting - and refreshing to hear someone
>say something useful in here.
Ah, well, I rarely have anything to say to mani, unless its something of a
strictly technical matter like this, over which there can be no dispute.
But anyway, since you enjoyed that tidbit, I guess I'll elaborate a bit. I
studied calligrapy a bit when I was in Japan, and this two-color brush was often
used in writing calligraphy. I mostly saw black with another dark color like
blue in writing, but I've also seen broad gradiations between two light colors
(i.e. yellow to light blue). Its sort of hard to explain how it is done, but if
you find a suitable brush, and play around, you'll figure it out.
I decided to scan off a brush that I was just using the other day, I bought from
a street-vendor in front of a calligraphy exhibit in Tokyo. Its huge, and made
from coarse hair, and it can hold a ton of pigment so I sometimes use it for
two-color brushwork. I scanned it in both dry and wet conditions, so you can
sorta see the shape of the brush in use. Its a bit more curved (you paint with
the curved tip) but you can't really see this on the scan. I just laid it down
on the scanner and the tip rolled downwards. Its not a great scan but you might
like it. Its at:
http://soli.inav.net/~ceicher/brush.jpg
I took a few classes in calligraphy, and I saw the teachers using the tip of an
ink-stick to push down the tip of their brush to wring excess ink. This works
really well with black/color brushwork. Just wring the tip a bit, then redip in
a watercolor. I tried it, it works great, but I'm too lazy to grind tons of sumi
ink by hand so I don't usually use ink-sticks.
Anyway, I've been collecting some information on ukiyo-e for publishing on my
website. I'll try to publish it asap, but I never seem to get it done. I'll try
to publish a notice in this newsgroup when I get it online. Let me know what
areas you're interested in, and I'll see if I have some good resources. Alas, my
best online resources are in Japanese only, but at least you can see some of the
images. Keep checking my main website at http://soli.inav.net/~ceicher/ and I
should have it up in a few weeks.