Dan & others modernists, Did you paint fine art
Niall
I was wondering if those (on the group)
who paint impressionist & abstract work
originally painted detailed fine art (portraits, landscapes)
I was surprised at the fact that
a few of the abstract impressionist icons
painted more traditional paintings (and well)
Also on the same sort of subject....
Is there modern art schools as such?
My art school friend suggested that most
modern artists actually trained in the fine arts
and took the fundamental knowledge learned there
to create modern art.
Cheers
Niall
Jeremy
of the opinion that what they do now is fine art...
Andrew D
danf...@NOSPAMyahoo.com(Dan Fox) wrote:
[snip]
>This group is populated by many hobby artists whose ideas about art are
>narrow and naive,
"Hobby artist" meaning anyone who disagrees with Dan's views on modern art?
Andy D.
"I'm a great speller - but a hopless tpyist!"
Tina Mammoser
American Heritage Dictionary:
fine art NOUN: 1. a. Art produced or intended primarily for beauty
rather than utility. b. Any of the art forms, such as sculpture,
painting, or music, used to create such art. Often used in the plural.
Modern art is fine art. Some schools will have certain approaches but
any good school (or good teacher if you learn privately) should teach
the fundamentals such as composition, colour, drawing, etc. If there are
schools just teaching abstraction I'd imagine the students come out with
weak work - but I don't know any from personal experience. Many schools
of end of year exhibitions by final year students, so that would be
worth a visit to see what you think. Visiting the school and sitting in
on classes is another option.
I for one painted realistic figurative paintings in oils. While learning
I did copies of Degas, moved on to landscapes, and still do figures
sometimes. Life classes are always important and I still do them despite
the fact that my main subject matter is landscape, it's the drawing
that's important. (it's on my resolution list to sign up for new life
classes...). In technique and practice I see no difference between
figurative and abstract. All my paintings require careful composition,
preliminary sketches and precise brushwork.
Tina.
--
********************
--Colorist expressionist contemporary landscapes direct from the
artist!--
HTTP://WWW.TINA-M.COM
mailto:ti...@tina-m.com
-----Limited editions and original prints from London artists!-----
HTTP://WWW.BRIGHTNEWART.COM
mailto:ti...@brightnewart.com
********************
Niall
For some reason I can not see dans reply
and my original thread is now someone elses?
Any thoughts
Niall
Tina Mammoser <time...@mac.com> wrote in message
news:3E2D1BCA...@mac.com...
Chris
>
> American Heritage Dictionary:
> fine art NOUN: 1. a. Art produced or intended primarily for beauty
> rather than utility. b. Any of the art forms, such as sculpture,
> painting, or music, used to create such art. Often used in the plural.
>
Hmmm, that seems to rule out a good deal of Goya, Courbet, and a host of
others (particularly Realist - as vs realist - artists)....Maybe the
definition needs a little extending.
Chris
Tina Mammoser
> Hi, Tina -
>
> There's something about life drawing. There's a figure studio in Cambridge
> that I attend whenever I can. Three hours from the model for 8 dollars -
> can't beat it!
That's a good price. I used to go to Blackheath Conservatoire but it's too
pricey for me now and I got tired of the same models all the time. And the
session is all day which I can't handle, prefer 2 hour sessions tops. Need
to call Lewisham ArtHouse - £7 per session or £69 for the full term. The per
session set-up is better because some weeks I can't get away from the studio
or other work. I also recommend the CityLit for anyone looking in London, but
be prepared to just do your own thing as most of the classes are beginners or
city workers trying to take up a hobby. :) The instructors there were quite
happy to let me get on with my own projects though.
Mani Deli
>Of course they did. All the the requirements for traditional figurative art
>are still there for expressionism, abstraction, pop, etc: composition,
>color harmony, form, for starters. I was a figurative artist for many years
>and taught foundation courses.
I suggest all here who think abstract expressionists could draw study
with a Fox clone. There are millions.
>This group is populated by many hobby artists whose ideas about art are
>narrow and naive, but they believe in them and so will never learn anthing.
Dan Fox wrote assuring that "However, if Mani goes to a Toronto
museum and poops in five places on the floor, and it's displayed,
that's art."
...no skill no art!
Want to get away from the indecipherable imbecilities and absurd pretensions of the modern art establishment?
Check out my web page http://www3.sympatico.ca/manideli/
Jiri Borsky
>
> Hi, Tina -
>
> There's something about life drawing. There's a figure studio in Cambridge
> that I attend whenever I can. Three hours from the model for 8 dollars -
> can't beat it!
Yes we can. :-)
Three quid for 2 hours every Thursday. Variety of good models, F and M.
Living in the provinces (The Midlands) has its advantages!
Jiri Borsky
www.borsky.com
Andrew D
>I agree with Dan's response too.
>
>American Heritage Dictionary:
>fine art NOUN: 1. a. Art produced or intended primarily for beauty
>rather than utility.
Much modern/expressionist art is anything but beautiful.
G*rd*n
| >
| > American Heritage Dictionary:
| > fine art NOUN: 1. a. Art produced or intended primarily for beauty
| > rather than utility. b. Any of the art forms, such as sculpture,
| > painting, or music, used to create such art. Often used in the plural.
| >
"Chris" <n...@this.address>:
| Hmmm, that seems to rule out a good deal of Goya, Courbet, and a host of
| others (particularly Realist - as vs realist - artists)....Maybe the
| definition needs a little extending.
_Beauty_ has many meanings, but it has probably been fatally
trivialized in English to mean only what is pretty, as if
"tastes good" could refer only to cotton candy; the taste of
an infant.
I disagree about utility. A lot, maybe all art is shamanistic
or magical, which is a kind of utility. And much of it is
immediately enjoyable in some way, which is the most basic
sort of utility there is. The word they probabaly should have
used was "instrumentality", the use of one thing to obtain
another, use of the thing as a tool. Objects of fine art are
generally supposed to exist for their own sake, rather than
to serve some other purpose (like instruction or propaganda).
--
(<><>) /*/
}"{ G*rd*n }"{ g...@panix.com }"{
{ http://www.etaoin.com | latest new material 1/19/03 <-adv't
Erik A. Mattila
Oops. The passive voice raises it's ugly head. "Who" supposes this
(besides Clement Greenburg)? The work of art is the spoor of the Art
God, of course (sometimes found still steaming on the sidewalk).
Erik
>
G*rd*n
|>|> I agree with Dan's response too.
|>|>
|>|> American Heritage Dictionary:
|>|> fine art NOUN: 1. a. Art produced or intended primarily for beauty
|>|> rather than utility. b. Any of the art forms, such as sculpture,
|>|> painting, or music, used to create such art. Often used in the plural.
|>|>
"Chris" <n...@this.address>:
|>| Hmmm, that seems to rule out a good deal of Goya, Courbet, and a host of
|>| others (particularly Realist - as vs realist - artists)....Maybe the
|>| definition needs a little extending.
G*rd*n:
| > _Beauty_ has many meanings, but it has probably been fatally
| > trivialized in English to mean only what is pretty, as if
| > "tastes good" could refer only to cotton candy; the taste of
| > an infant.
| >
| > I disagree about utility. A lot, maybe all art is shamanistic
| > or magical, which is a kind of utility. And much of it is
| > immediately enjoyable in some way, which is the most basic
| > sort of utility there is. The word they probabaly should have
| > used was "instrumentality", the use of one thing to obtain
| > another, use of the thing as a tool. Objects of fine art are
| > generally supposed to exist for their own sake, rather than
| > to serve some other purpose (like instruction or propaganda).
| Oops. The passive voice raises it's ugly head. "Who" supposes this
| (besides Clement Greenburg)? ...
By the people who say "_Ars_gratia_artis_" and who write the
American Heritage Dictionary, of course. But also, a lot of
people behave that way, for example, keep a pretty knickknack
on a shelf. It's not there to drive a nail, keep the dog from
sitting on the couch, catch flies or prove something (although
it may do all these things by the way). It is, therefore,
art.
But as you say there is also the Art God.
Ivor E. Black
right@the_end.of.my_tether says...
>Much modern/expressionist art is anything but beautiful.
Oh, how can I resist saying it...
"Beauty is in the eye of the beholder."
There, I dared to do it!
G*rd*n
| >Much modern/expressionist art is anything but beautiful.
bla...@noemailever.com (Ivor E. Black):
| Oh, how can I resist saying it...
|
| "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder."
|
| There, I dared to do it!
In that case, you don't need any art -- just the eye.
Ivor E. Black
>In that case, you don't need any art -- just the eye.
Ahhhh! You present me with an opportunity for
tale telling that I simply can't resist.
The other day I volunteered to patch nail holes
created by art hangings on the walls at Village
Hall where I live. This was preparatory to painting
the walls the following day, getting ready for
another season of art exhibits in our public
buildings.
When I first arrived, I was standing looking at
the seemingly blank wall, saying to myself that
what I had thought would be a half-hour job was
going to be longer - I've never seen so many nail
holes. I have no idea who the man was who walked
by at that moment and and said to me,
"The paintings aren't there any longer."
I replied,
"Well, sure they are. I can see them. I'm
an artist, after all."
He said something unintelligible to me and I
continued,
"It takes ARTISTIC VISION, you see. Not just
everyone can see them."
He mumbled something further as he walked off,
probably to the effect that the village is full
of nut cases like me...
G*rd*n
| >In that case, you don't need any art -- just the eye.
bla...@noemailever.com (Ivor E. Black):
You should consider becoming a Zen master. As I
recall a similar tale is told of one of their heavy
hitters.
Andrew D
Black) wrote:
Ah, a rebel without applause!
Andrew D
Black) wrote:
>The other day I volunteered to patch nail holes
>created by art hangings on the walls at Village
>Hall where I live. This was preparatory to painting
>the walls the following day, getting ready for
>another season of art exhibits in our public
>buildings.
>
>When I first arrived, I was standing looking at
>the seemingly blank wall, saying to myself that
>what I had thought would be a half-hour job was
>going to be longer - I've never seen so many nail
>holes.
"Hanging rails" (picture rails) - the only way to go.
Ivor E. Black
right@the_end.of.my_tether says...
>"Hanging rails" (picture rails) - the only way to go.
Thank you. We village idiots already thought
of that. I didn't want to make the story longer
than necessary, but one of the "paint day" projects
was to install just such rails. No more need for
nail-hole patching for me! We are very
fortunate to have a cabinet maker (and potter) on
our committee and he made the rails himself. Now
we need to purchase the hangers - or make them
ourselves before the first season exhibit in Feb.
Ivor E. Black
right@the_end.of.my_tether says...
>Ah, a rebel without applause!
Wrong! I did hear 'one hand clapping!'
You gotta have 'artistic hearing' though...