obscenity
mdeli
population of paranoid sexually frustrated moralists who consider a
view of certain body parts black obscenity tantamount to mass moral
decay; this while seeking amusement in viewing what we call
entertainment-adventure which consists of huge daily doses of larceny
and people killing and mutilating each other.
Mass sexual paranoia gives our esteemed executives of the
superstition business an enhanced ability to indoctrinate us into a
nation prudes who willingly fill there tax exempt coffers while
worrying about victimless crimes. Our politicians, in order to divert
our minds from more serious matters such as their possible corruption
also profit by espousing mass prudery. Police forces can to a degree
avoid the risks of dealing with dangerous criminals by concentrating
on our far less threatening moral offenders.
We are a society of frustrated bored entertainment saturated
citizens. While our males attempt to conform to imaginary
super-hero-macho values we are all in the name of "family values,"
supposed to idealize an anorexic female with huge mammaries who is
expected to stay at home worrying about god and her appearance while
expanding the population. And let us never forget that we are also
blessed by a majority of reverent provincial chauvinist prudes who
imagine that god loves them for morally combating those offering a
glimpse of forbidden body parts.
Paradoxically I believe, that we are in great part a society which
sexually speaking, suggests practically everything and does almost
nothing.
...no skill no art
Modern Academic Art is incompetence in search of an idea.
Tired of Modern Art? Check out my web page!
mdeli
deeply affects some people, especially those more sensitive romantic
souls aspiring to a profession. When such a soul passes through the
museum's Modern Academic section and sees all those large colorful
abstractions and minimal sculptural concoctions along with earlier
incompetent realism he is often deeply inspired. In some, a small
tickle in the back of the mind fires off a revelation. "By god I can
learn to do THAT." When he sees art books on the creators of this
stuff it makes him feel ecstatic. When he learns what prices Blue Chip
modern paintings go for, he is bowled over. "By god, I'll be rich."
A percentage of those who have had this experience go on to study at
some Modern Art academy convinced they can fulfill their dreams. Here
they are assured that skill and craft count for little by teachers who
have nearly none. They are then encouraged to imitate those who
created THAT kind of stuff which originally inspired them. All the
while this dominating theme runs through their naive minds, "I can do
THAT," and indeed, most can.
In school they study the most famous Modern Academic paintings in some
detail and their confidence overflows. The incompetent drawings of
their favorite masters now assure them that competence at this
difficult pursuit is of little necessity. This comes as a great
relief. The only slightly negative thing these now aspiring geniuses
learn is the starving artist myth. Armed by a learned creed and with
an almost religious enthusiasm, their art school period eventually
comes to a close and they head out to the real world. What do they
have to fear, for doubtlessly they and their teachers know that they
can do THAT.
They now venture off into the real world with their imagined abilities
and set off to professionally do THAT. For some the starving artist
myth becomes a reality, but most go on to other professions. Most of
those remaining are indeed able to do THAT just as well as their
successful mentors, yet they never understand why THAT hasn't gained
them glory and riches. A few with the right connections and
personality take up the profession of teaching the next generation of
failures while a very small handful win the Modern Academic Art
Lottery and become the next generation of Blue Chip Modern artists.
Ricardo Pontes
tadema, Vibert etc.. But seeing the low standards in modern sections of
museums such as the National Gallery of Art here in Washington D.C. i told
myself that i could do that, as a matter of fact i made many abstractions
and conceptual crap to choke a giant cow. I never believed the stuff, but i
managed to fool everyone in the school, and i even had shows with me
exhibiting this crap. It was a personal joke that i amused myself doing.
One thing i noticed in art school is that most of the students wanted to
draw, paint and sculpt realistically but were discouraged by teachers from
doing figurative work , they called it passe at the time. Out of fashion, we
were above that they said :) I managed to squeeze out as much figurative
work as possible, but obviously i did not make a good student because the
teachers gave me pretty awful grades :)
I dont give anyone respect for telling me that they graduated with a fine
arts degree from bal bla bla bla, and then got their masters in bla bla bla
bla. A fine arts degree in this time is completly worthless, if you hae one,
burn it or wipe your ass with it. It means nothing, i allot more respect for
graphic art majors, at least they can express something.
--
-----------------------------------------------------
Click here for Free Video!!
http://www.gohip.com/free_video/
"mdeli" <hug...@interlog.com> wrote in message
news:3ad11b56...@news.psi.ca...
These souls just wanted to feel like an artist. And for 40k dollards your
parents gave you the experience. But alas that was not an artists
experience, more of a con artist education.
> They now venture off into the real world with their imagined abilities
> and set off to professionally do THAT. For some the starving artist
> myth becomes a reality, but most go on to other professions. Most of
> those remaining are indeed able to do THAT just as well as their
> successful mentors, yet they never understand why THAT hasn't gained
> them glory and riches. A few with the right connections and
> personality take up the profession of teaching the next generation of
> failures while a very small handful win the Modern Academic Art
> Lottery and become the next generation of Blue Chip Modern artists.
> ...no skill no art
>
The cycle goes on. Right Winston?
Guerdis
"Ricardo Pontes" <Ricard...@yahoo.com>
> I dont give anyone respect for telling me that they graduated with a fine
> arts degree from bal bla bla bla, and then got their masters in bla bla
bla
> bla. A fine arts degree in this time is completly worthless, if you hae
one,
> burn it or wipe your ass with it. It means nothing, i allot more respect
for
> graphic art majors, at least they can express something.
You know, most good colleges these days award BFAs in graphic arts. The same
degree as the painters get, with differing course requirements. This is so
that the graphic art students meet the same standards as the fine art
students, who traditionally face much more difficult programs.
Any good painter/artist can do graphic work in his or her sleep. I took a
grand total of one graphic design course, for it was required of me. I've
been doing design work for a living for more than 10 years. It isn't about
coursework, it's about ability...talent.
You really should stop generalizing about art school. You only tarnish
yourself. I and many others who participate in this group had very rewarding
and productive experiences in school. I went into school an able artist and
emerged a much more well-rounded and experienced one. I owe a great deal to
my mentors, none of whom produce or promote the sorts of nonsense you and
others claim they do in your generalizations.
What you suffer from is a sort of class envy. You feel rejected or alienated
by what you see as an acknowledged authority or establishment, and your
reaction therefore is to try to slander and downgrade it. Your efforts will
both fail miserably and shove you further out into the lonely void populated
by bitter cretins like Mani DeLi. Much better for you would be to understand
what you criticize before blindly stumbling forth. If you are truly an
artist, what have you to lose in an educated community of colleagues?
Hutto
mdeli
>You know, most good colleges these days award BFAs in graphic arts. The same
>degree as the painters get, with differing course requirements. This is so
>that the graphic art students meet the same standards as the fine art
>students, who traditionally face much more difficult programs.
>
>Any good painter/artist can do graphic work in his or her sleep. I took a
>grand total of one graphic design course, for it was required of me. I've
>been doing design work for a living for more than 10 years. It isn't about
>coursework, it's about ability...talent.
So what good did all those other courses do you? I thought you don't
consider graphic design art.
>What you suffer from is a sort of class envy. You feel rejected or alienated
>by what you see as an acknowledged authority or establishment, and your
>reaction therefore is to try to slander and downgrade it. Your efforts will
>both fail miserably and shove you further out into the lonely void populated
>by bitter cretins like Mani DeLi. Much better for you would be to understand
>what you criticize before blindly stumbling forth. If you are truly an
>artist, what have you to lose in an educated community of colleagues?
The usual psychobabble from an average hack. Take a look at his
artwork if he ever again has the nerve to show it. He's a grand
example of a modern academic success who can't hear criticism without
blowing a gasket and getting off into Hitler. He apparently never got
enough connections to teach the next generation of failures.
caliban
Although I agree with most everything you've written, I want to make one
tiny correction. I have a MFA in painting and I'm not especially good at
pure graphic work. Although Ricky/mani may not consider me a good painter,
ArtForum, Art in America, and the New York Times does. I care what the Times
thinks. I don't care what Ricky/mani thinks. Does that make me a bad person?
cal
"Guerdis" <gue...@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:9btslo$mu1$1...@nntp9.atl.mindspring.net...
Ricardo Pontes
>
> You know, most good colleges these days award BFAs in graphic arts. The
same
> degree as the painters get, with differing course requirements. This is so
> that the graphic art students meet the same standards as the fine art
> students, who traditionally face much more difficult programs.
What type of more difficult programs do fine art students face? Do you
believe that illustrators get more training than fine artists?
>
> Any good painter/artist can do graphic work in his or her sleep. I took a
> grand total of one graphic design course, for it was required of me. I've
> been doing design work for a living for more than 10 years. It isn't about
> coursework, it's about ability...talent.
Why did you choose graphic design? What happen to all of the other classes
that you took. If you only took 1 class of graphic design then im sure that
you were trying to excel in other areas, perhaps fine art? Would you say
that you should have taken more classes in graphic design? Im sure there was
more to be learned.
>
> You really should stop generalizing about art school. You only tarnish
> yourself. I and many others who participate in this group had very
rewarding
> and productive experiences in school. I went into school an able artist
and
> emerged a much more well-rounded and experienced one. I owe a great deal
to
> my mentors, none of whom produce or promote the sorts of nonsense you and
> others claim they do in your generalizations.
What type of nonsense do i claim? There is one way to find out if you were a
truly able artist, and that is to show the group some of your drawings
before you entered school and after you entered school. Would the group like
that???
>
> What you suffer from is a sort of class envy. You feel rejected or
alienated
> by what you see as an acknowledged authority or establishment, and your
> reaction therefore is to try to slander and downgrade it. Your efforts
will
> both fail miserably and shove you further out into the lonely void
populated
> by bitter cretins like Mani DeLi. Much better for you would be to
understand
> what you criticize before blindly stumbling forth. If you are truly an
> artist, what have you to lose in an educated community of colleagues?
>
Do you think my slander and downgrading of modern art is as bad as
modernists who look down on all classical artists as if they are above them.
Who look at great artists work as kitsch. Who have thrown away every
necessary tool to produce art in the search for novelty?
Ricardo Pontes
RBrac53660
>modernists who look down on all classical artists as if they are above them.
>Who look at great artists work as kitsch. Who have thrown away every
>necessary tool to produce art in the search for novelty?
>
Your slander against Modern Art is the very same slander Academions of the 19th
century said about modern artist. I'mm sorry but if you back me into a corner
I'm going to fight you. However today it is different in art school you can
let your creativity take you in any number of paths be it classical or modern
or (get this) post modern. By the time your working on your masters you know
which way to go. Then you work on the brain in grad school.
I'm sure you would never understand this but I like to work with electrcity,
earth, manufactered materials and projected images. You and Mani will never get
it so why don't you give it up:) Oh by the way I love the Classical painters
they were very good at "projecting images".
A note to caliban what comes after post modern?
www.geocities.com/winston53660/wbphotog.html
Ricardo Pontes
--
-----------------------------------------------------
Click here for Free Video!!
http://www.gohip.com/free_video/
"RBrac53660" <rbrac...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20010424040029...@ng-df1.aol.com...
> >Do you think my slander and downgrading of modern art is as bad as
> >modernists who look down on all classical artists as if they are above
them.
> >Who look at great artists work as kitsch. Who have thrown away every
> >necessary tool to produce art in the search for novelty?
> >
>
> Your slander against Modern Art is the very same slander Academions of the
19th
> century said about modern artist.
Winston, i would like very much for you to tell me exactly which artists
slandered modern artist in the 19th century.
I'mm sorry but if you back me into a corner
> I'm going to fight you. However today it is different in art school you
can
> let your creativity take you in any number of paths be it classical or
modern
> or (get this) post modern. By the time your working on your masters you
know
> which way to go.
Mcdonalds or Wendys
Then you work on the brain in grad school.
>
> I'm sure you would never understand this but I like to work with
electrcity,
> earth, manufactered materials and projected images. You and Mani will
never get
> it so why don't you give it up:) Oh by the way I love the Classical
painters
> they were very good at "projecting images".
>
>
You forget that I actually studied modern art, and for a while I did do what
the teachers asked. I just started to question them, and they did not like
it , they did not have any explanations for their actions besides talking
students to death with lengthy nonsense mambo jumbo art talk. Winston, I do
get it. You took the easy way out, you found a door that gave you all you
needed without talent and skill and you took it. You took a shortcut to hard
work. When someone tries to be original it just looks contrived.
Ricardo Pontes
ljrobins
> -
>
> You forget that I actually studied modern art, and for a while I did do what
> the teachers asked. I just started to question them, and they did not like
> it , they did not have any explanations for their actions besides talking
> students to death with lengthy nonsense mambo jumbo art talk.
Again, my school was different. The instructors who taught me embraced
challenge. But whatever, you will never take off those pee coloured glasses of
yours.
> Winston, I do
> get it. You took the easy way out, you found a door that gave you all you
> needed without talent and skill and you took it. You took a shortcut to hard
> work. When someone tries to be original it just looks contrived.
Again, BS. Please define talent and skill before suggesting contemporary or
modern artists don't have it. Pease define hard work. These generalizations of
yours suck.
Marilyn
Friday night I attended the opening for the Victoria College of Art Grad Show and
the work was overwhelming: original ideas and use of materials, attention to
details, good presentation. Enough talent to knock you off your feet. This is a
private art college, with very little money, hardly any equipment. These students
are very committed. They know that they may never make a living making art,
nevertheless they are putting all their resources into it.
I don't know what these "bitter feebs" here are talking about or when they last
attended a grad show or visited an art college.
Marilyn
Chris
Ricardo Pontes wrote:
> Do you think my slander and downgrading of modern art is as bad as
> modernists who look down on all classical artists as if they are above them.
> Who look at great artists work as kitsch. Who have thrown away every
> necessary tool to produce art in the search for novelty?
>
> Ricardo Pontes
1) Re. what modernists (whoever they are) think? Who really cares? If someone
rejects an accomplished painter from other times, without good reason, that's
their loss.
2) What exactly has been thrown away? You live in the DC area; if the Corcoran
or the Phillips are not to your liking; there's a good size collection at the
National Gallery. Not everything, to be sure, but more than enough to keep one
busy for a lifetime.
I'm just curious Ricardo, I have no interest in starting a flame war. Quite
prefer classical art; I even enjoy French Academic art from the 19th Century,
particularly Bouguereau. (FWIW - B., was rather tolerant of modernism, in a very
circumspect sort of way. He admitted that he didn't see the way they did, or
claimed to see, and hence refrained from comment.. One can't forget that many of
the young artists who formed the core of the Nabis and Fauvists studied under
him. Gerome, who was far more the martinet, was the one who stood on the steps
and tried to prevent the President of France from entering the Salon d"Automne,
if I remember correctly. Quite the performance artist, that one :). But that
doesn't mean that one should discount other forms of art; the modernism that you
tend to reject is as representative of its time as the classicists were of
theirs.
Re the Corcoran school - isn't that also associated with George Washington
University? If so, I have one rather close acquaintance who took some classes
there in the early 70's, and wound up spending the time painting stripes. He was
not amused...
Cheers;
Chris
Joseph Bennett
Which artists slandered "modern art" in the 19th Century? All of the
established Academics, who started unleasing barrage after barrage at
anyone who tried anything new, starting with the Barbizons and reaching
apocalyptic fervor with the rise of the Impressionists. The entire
history of 19th Century European Art is one of controversy and flames
directed at the new painters, flames far hotter than anything Mani has
been able to devise. The French are magnificent cursers, and some of
them could paint.
A better question might be: Which movement or school has made a serious
impact on art, without arousing controversy?
I can't think of any.
To me, this constant battle between the old and the new is just so much
hot air, vented to satisfy one ego or another. Time would be better
spent in my opinion if invested in learning from each other.
Ricardo Pontes wrote:
>
> --
ljrobins
> Ricardo Pontes wrote:
>
> > Do you think my slander and downgrading of modern art is as bad as
> > modernists who look down on all classical artists as if they are above them.
> > Who look at great artists work as kitsch. Who have thrown away every
> > necessary tool to produce art in the search for novelty?
> >
> > Ricardo Pontes
>
> 1) Re. what modernists (whoever they are) think? Who really cares? If someone
> rejects an accomplished painter from other times, without good reason, that's
> their loss.
I agree. In fact, numerous modern artists have held classical artists in high
regard. David Hockney is one. His recent research into the use of a camera lucida
has only proved to increase his awe of artists like Ingres. In fact, this research
comes out of his love for art, art history and the artist, not out of any
bitterness or spite.
Bateman also had huge respect for Modern artists like Cezann, Rothko and Reinhardt.
He can be both a realist/wildlife painter and respect the Modernists. Why can't you
Ricardo?
mdeli
wrote:
>Hey G
>
>Although I agree with most everything you've written, I want to make one
>tiny correction. I have a MFA in painting and I'm not especially good at
>pure graphic work. Although Ricky/mani may not consider me a good painter,
>ArtForum, Art in America, and the New York Times does. I care what the Times
>thinks. I don't care what Ricky/mani thinks. Does that make me a bad person?
How about some quotes? I'd especially like to see the one where the NY
Times says you are a good at anything.
" "
has to be admired. And I agree with most of what you have to
say...........but I dont want to see it all of the time.
"mdeli" <hug...@interlog.com> wrote in message
news:3ad11b56...@news.psi.ca...
" "
"Ricardo Pontes" <Ricard...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:e0VNWwCzAHA.199@cpmsnbbsa09...
" "
Marilyn
\" \" wrote:
> wow. how do you keep it up? Im really impressed. To be bitter for so long
> has to be admired. And I agree with most of what you have to
> say...........but I dont want to see it all of the time.
>
He just reprints pages from his book, over and over and over.
Hill@aol.com Amy Hill
Did you leave the screen door open? We have mosquitoes!
c
"mdeli" <hug...@interlog.com> wrote in message
news:3ae51630...@news.psi.ca...
RBrac53660
>Times says you are a good at anything.
>...no skill no art
Ohhh this person from the NYtimes is a lot more lucid then I am in writting:
"Artists are enigines of invention. Like children who make toys and games from
pots and pans, popsickle sticks and bottle tops, artist reconfigure unlikely
materials for unexpteded purposes. Today they rearrange industrial goods and
convert technolgies to aesthetic ends, and the technological aspect is becoming
a contemporary specialty".
Vicki Goldberg NY times 4/22/01
In other words you are good at realizing your self in a platonic cave as the
person who is not scared of the shadow cast by the light.
But Mani YOU are scared of the shadow cast by yourself.
Boogada boogada
RBrac53660
>
>
>Did you leave the screen door open? We have mosquitoes!
I guess I did on our Yellow Submarine;)
Ricardo Pontes
> Again, BS. Please define talent and skill before suggesting contemporary
or
> modern artists don't have it. Pease define hard work. These
generalizations of
> yours suck.
>
>
As for talent and skill look at the art of Gian Lorenzo Bernini.
As for worthless charatans look at Pollock.
If you cannot draw beyond the ability of a large ape then you are no artist.
RIcardo Pontes
ljrobins
> If you cannot draw beyond the ability of a large ape then you are no artist.
>
Einstein failed math. And at times, he got so bored with his schoolwork that he
stopped doing it and consequently failed math. Einstein's mathematics
professor, Hermann Minkowski, got so angered with Albert's lack of interest he
would call him a "lazy dog." Then when Einstein was in college, he supposedly
got upset because the Physics Professors only covered the "Old Physics" and
Einstein wanted to learn about the "New Physics."
Does that mean he was a faker physicist because he wouldn't spend enough time
on foundation mathematics and physics?
lissa
Ricardo Pontes
>
> 1) Re. what modernists (whoever they are) think? Who really cares? If
someone
> rejects an accomplished painter from other times, without good reason,
that's
> their loss.
>
> 2) What exactly has been thrown away? You live in the DC area; if the
Corcoran
> or the Phillips are not to your liking; there's a good size collection at
the
> National Gallery. Not everything, to be sure, but more than enough to keep
one
> busy for a lifetime.
The Corcoran and the Philips has a decent collection. Not so much the
Philips. The Corcoran has one of the best busts I have seen. Its by Guisuppe
Croft(sp). Anyone here familiar with him, I have only been able to find that
one sculpture. The Veiled Nun... There are plenty of galleries that show
great art. But where are the galleries that display modern contemporary
realists in D.C.?? Where can I see the work of Jeffrey Mims, Annigoni,
Nelson Shanks etc.. Better yet there is no outlet for work by several
artists that I know like John Murray, Rob Liberace, Rick Weaver, Douglas
Hofman... Many of the last artists I mentioned have made works that I would
consider up there with any of the masters... But no way of actually seeing
their work.
>
> I'm just curious Ricardo, I have no interest in starting a flame war.
Quite
> prefer classical art; I even enjoy French Academic art from the 19th
Century,
> particularly Bouguereau. (FWIW - B., was rather tolerant of modernism, in
a very
> circumspect sort of way. He admitted that he didn't see the way they did,
or
> claimed to see, and hence refrained from comment..
Perhaps he did not see this coming...
One can't forget that many of
> the young artists who formed the core of the Nabis and Fauvists studied
under
> him. Gerome, who was far more the martinet, was the one who stood on the
steps
> and tried to prevent the President of France from entering the Salon
d"Automne,
> if I remember correctly. Quite the performance artist, that one :). But
that
> doesn't mean that one should discount other forms of art; the modernism
that you
> tend to reject is as representative of its time as the classicists were of
> theirs.
I don't believe that modernists are producing art. Art should use valuable
skills acquired through the ages in order to progress. Modernists have
thrown aside every necessary requirement to make art. I can understand some
artists not wanting to use some skills such as perspective in their drawings
if they are going for a flat look etc.. But the one thing that is required
in art is Drawing..
Just imagine if artists before discovering perspective thought that there
was all there was to learn about art, and needed no further progress. You
would never have the accomplishment of the artists who did use perspective
in their art. 20th century art is about getting rid of the old and trying
something totally new for the sake of it being new. 20th century is about
expression, ideas and emotions in art, too bad that they got rid of the
only thing that could have captured those things and that was drawing.
>
> Re the Corcoran school - isn't that also associated with George Washington
> University? If so, I have one rather close acquaintance who took some
classes
> there in the early 70's, and wound up spending the time painting stripes.
He was
> not amused...
>
No, its not. Its in the same location but they are very different. The
Corcoran is actually a rather nice place, too bad that they are going this
tacky addition to their museum. Its going to be the Contemporary art
section, with fruity colors and such. Impressive... :(
Ricardo Pontes
> Cheers;
>
> Chris
>
>
" "
way of making sure people read it?
"Marilyn" <mwe...@islandnet.com> wrote in message
news:3AE61C32...@islandnet.com...
Sharon Barcone
sharon
Marilyn wrote in message <3AE61C32...@islandnet.com>...
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
ljrobins
Sharon Barcone wrote:
> It's called marketing...
>
> sharon
Yeah, and most companies know they need to change their image or ads fairly
regularly so as not to bore the masses ...
lissa
Sharon Barcone
sharon
Marilyn Welch wrote in message ...
>In tv ads there is a limit to the number of times an item is repeated.
>It is never repeated more than six times because some study proved that
>people turn off at the 7th repeat.
>
>Count 'em and weep DeLi!
>
>Marilyn
Marilyn
> I didn't say it was good marketing!
>
> sharon
He usually repeats himself within the ad more than 6 times AND he has been
using the same ad for over 6 years.
Marilyn
mdeli
>Your slander against Modern Art is the very same slander Academicism of the 19th
>century said about modern artist.
And what was that? Most of the famous academicians didn't give a damn
about the moderns of that time. This is completely exaggerated by
modern art history books.
It is not generally known that many conservative academicians openly
admitted to being influenced by anti?academic styles, especially by
Impressionism. By the 1890s, even some academicians began to call
themselves "Impressionists." A close look at painted passages,
especially of late academic work from the 1880s and onward, reveals
this influence. Artists like Bouguereau, Gerome and Meissonier who
almost all historians now consider the three leading academic
offenders used surprisingly large amounts of impressionist technique.
Anyone willing to look closely at their works will discover whole
impressionistic paintings among the details. ***[illustrate]. Were
these passages presented separately as single paintings, they would be
considered fine examples of the Impressionist style. The backgrounds
and softened foreground passages, especially in the works of
Meissonier and Bouguereau, were frequently painted in the loosest
impressionistic manner.
In truth the official academic attitude at its worst tended to be less
rigid than is generally believed. In France, even though the tedium of
academic painting increased and its precepts became more and more
doctrinaire, after 1870, concessions were made to the "moderns" in
spite of the protests of appalled conservatives."
> I'mm sorry but if you back me into a corner
>I'm going to fight you.
What corner?
> However today it is different in art school you can
>let your creativity take you in any number of paths be it classical or modern
>or (get this) post modern.
Check the path this guy took.
> By the time your working on your masters you know
>which way to go. Then you work on the brain in grad school.
Hope you are working on the brain. By the time you're finished you can
get a teaching position if you AKed the right people. Or you can do
what most do namely get another profession.
>
>I'm sure you would never understand this but I like to work with electrcity,
>earth, manufactered materials and projected images. You and Mani will never get
>it so why don't you give it up:)
get what?
>Oh by the way I love the Classical painters
>they were very good at "projecting images".
?
mdeli
>In tv ads there is a limit to the number of times an item is repeated.
>It is never repeated more than six times because some study proved that
>people turn off at the 7th repeat.
>
>Count 'em and weep DeLi!
>
>Marilyn
You just addressed this point about five times.
Marilyn who is going through cerebral menopause imagines that no one
here should repeat anything they said before. I'm glad its enough to
make her bitter.
There are always new people here who mention old points that I feel
deserve answering. If that irritates you so much why not kill file my
stuff and join embittered Sharon whose nerves only allow her to read
agreeable messages.
Marilyn who is a total boob as far as art history is concerned has yet
to answer some of my points about her mythological beliefs. I'll
repeat some of those messages at some time.
mdeli
>>How about some quotes? I'd especially like to see the one where the NY
>>Times says you are a good at anything.
>>...no skill no art
>
>Ohhh this person from the NYtimes is a lot more lucid then I am in writting:
>
>"Artists are enigines of invention. Like children who make toys and games from
>pots and pans, popsickle sticks and bottle tops, artist reconfigure unlikely
>materials for unexpteded purposes. Today they rearrange industrial goods and
>convert technolgies to aesthetic ends, and the technological aspect is becoming
>a contemporary specialty".
>Vicki Goldberg NY times 4/22/01
Haven't noticed that this quote says anything good about Caliban
mdeli
>wow. how do you keep it up? Im really impressed. To be bitter for so long
>has to be admired. And I agree with most of what you have to
>say...........but I dont want to see it all of the time.
...but it sounds like a biography of Fox doesn't it?
RBrac53660
>
And yes it is a real bore your web page. Also your AGITPROP is self flatulent.
RBrac53660
yeah right :(
RBrac53660
hgood or mani deli. He's a friggen asshole straight up. He needs a rod up the
rod up his arse
>He usually repeats himself within the ad more than 6 times AND he has been
>using the same ad for over 6 years.
>
>
mdeli
I haven't noticed that this irritated asshole has ever said anything
rational about my points, nor has he said anything about our genius
artzy fartzy Dan Fox' work. I guess he spends his days cursing. Some
art schools are filled with similar schmucks.
>What a load of crap, or self serving, this little person is that claims to be
>hgood or mani deli. He's a friggen asshole straight up. He needs a rod up the
>rod up his arse
>www.geocities.com/winston53660/wbphotog.html
Take a look at his pathetic work and you will know why he is such an
angry failure.
...no skill no art
Modern Academic Art is incompetence in search of an idea.
Tired of Modern Art? Check out my web page!
Toni Donelow Stewart
--
Toni Donelow Stewart
Toni Donelow Stewart Illustrations
http://i.am/tonidonelowstewart<<< TALENTED? (NO art schooling! OMG!)
tonidonel...@hotmail.com .
Royal Oak, Michigan, USA
"RBrac53660" <rbrac...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20010427005336...@ng-cv1.aol.com...
Tracy Miller
> (RBrac53660) wrote:
>
>I haven't noticed that this irritated asshole has ever said anything
>rational about my points,
You have absolutely no business putting others down for not being
rational. YOU are the one who is not rational.
>nor has he said anything about our genius
>artzy fartzy Dan Fox' work. I guess he spends his days cursing. Some
>art schools are filled with similar schmucks.
Yeah, Schmucks like you. You are the one who spends your days
cursing.
>
>>What a load of crap, or self serving, this little person is that claims to be
>>hgood or mani deli. He's a friggen asshole straight up. He needs a rod up the
>>rod up his arse
Right on, RBrac.
>
>>www.geocities.com/winston53660/wbphotog.html
>
>Take a look at his pathetic work and you will know why he is such an
>angry failure.
Take a look at your own work and you will know why you are such an
angry FAILURE!
>...no skill no art
Mani has neither.
>
>Modern Academic Art is incompetence in search of an idea.
There is a "poet" in my city named Mani, and he bores us terribly
with his poem about money. It goes: "Money money money money.....
ad infinitum".
>
>Tired of Modern Art? Check out my web page!
See his "Modern" self-loathing crap!
RBrac53660
mdeli
>Now, now. Be gentle with mdeli. We make interesting art and have
>interesting lives.
I'm sure your life of AKing gallery owners and potential customers is
fascinating.
> He's just a bitter old gentleman sitting up in Toronto,
>with nothing but a website, a self-published book, and this newsgroup to
>keep him going. You young guys have got to learn more consideration - send
>him some soup or some Prozac or something instead of calling names!
>
I love Dan's interpretation of people who disagree with him. I guess
its an artzy fartzy requirement. I like the "he has nothing ..."
statement. Dan should have half of what I have. Well at least he's
back at psychobabble which matches all the latest artzy fartzy
messages.
I'm sure at least one artzy fartzy here might turn off the flames
coming out of his ass and survey Dan's schmiers and tell us about
their great artistic merit.
I noticed that even the most case hardened artzy fartzy here hasn't
made a peep about Dan's masterpieces. I guess even they feel his work
might just be on a crap level which embarrasses them into silence. Fox
should realize that artzy fartzies are sensitive enough to distinguish
the ordinary run-of-the -mill schmier from an acclaimed museum
schmier.
...no skill no art
Modern Academic Art is incompetence in search of an idea.
Tired of Modern Art? Check out my web page!
RBrac53660
kinda leads me to believe that there should be artzy fartzie people here. Am I
wrong about this?
>I guess
>its an artzy fartzy requirement.
Or rather is this a Jr. Stalinists group?
>Modern Academic Art is incompetence in search of an idea.
>
>Tired of Mani Art? Check out another web page!
>
mdeli
>You know the last time I checked this was rec.arts.fine correct? The title
>kinda leads me to believe that there should be artzy fartzie people here. Am I
>wrong about this?
Completely right!
You can check this guys web site for true artzy fartzy incompetence.
...no skill no art
Modern Academic Art is incompetence in search of an idea.
Tired of Modern Art? Check out my web page!
RBrac53660
>
> You can check this guys web site for true artzy fartzy incompetence.
>...no skill no art
>
Okay Sir Mani I yield to your Stalinist techniques.
But what is really, really needed is knowledge of your masterbatory
techniques.
Also if you know anything about the cremaster (sp?) muscle I'd like to know
the correct spelling in french and english also its location on the human body.
Be it male or female. ;)
mdeli
>>Completely right!
>>
>> You can check this guys web site for true artzy fartzy incompetence.
>>...no skill no art
>>
>
>Okay Sir Mani I yield to your Stalinist techniques.
For someone who has no technique I remind you that you forgot to
mention Hitler.
>
> But what is really, really needed is knowledge of your masterbatory
>techniques.
What is really needed is for you to be realistic and compare your work
to that of someone who has skill or to get someone here to get up
enough nerve to tell you what they really think.
Check it out at www.geocities.com/winston53660/wbphotog.html
Peter H.M. Brooks
> (RBrac53660) wrote:
>
> >>Completely right!
> >>
> >> You can check this guys web site for true artzy fartzy
incompetence.
> >>...no skill no art
> >>
> >
> >Okay Sir Mani I yield to your Stalinist techniques.
>
> For someone who has no technique I remind you that you forgot to
> mention Hitler.
>
a great love of animals - no doubt some of these characteristics
affected his painting ability.
I would have thought that an authentic 'Hitler' would fetch a fair
price, though.
--
"Death, like eating roast chicken or going to war, is an area in which
no absolutely kind or wholesome things happen." Derek Roskell BMJ
10/02/2001
RBrac53660
>>> You can check this guys web site for true artzy fartzy incompetence.
>>>...no skill no art
Pfffft what ever Mani. You can stay in your platonic cave forever. And the
sand box is all yours since you do not play well with others.
mdeli
connections who has successfully devoted himself to popular stupidity.
For every Kelly there about a thousand failures who do the same thing
and just can't understand why they can't get as far with their similar
garbage. That is not to say that Kelly has gotten very far compared to
my favorite three stooges of Modern Academic Art, Pollock, Rothko and
de Kooning. Note that there are about a hundred Kellys for every
stooge.
Kelly a review of a review.
Think of how much more interesting it would be if we had reviews from
both sides of the polarized debate. Note the ridicules Artspeak in the
complete article. Nothing new about this I've read about forty years
of this sort of drivel here mostly for the avant gone.
>"Ellsworth Kelly's Little Patch of Eden," From NY Times Magazine-today: (snipped here and there)
> The latest from Ellsworth Kelly -- more blasts of dizzy color married in rectangular combinations of sublime geometry-- is the epitome of civilized discourse.
Notice the pompous first Artspeak sentence; "the epitome of civilized
discourse," indeed.
>Based on the subtlest distinctions of form and color, wherein the difference of an inch in size or the position of a panel on a wall comes to resemble a moral choice,
Nobody would give a damn if everything were five inches off. This is
pure excuse theory. Ah yes remember If god Mondrian would be just a
quarter of an inch off I'm sure the boob who wrote this review
believes that the whole world would take notice. I often wonder how
one would prove this.
> Kelly's works presume that we are the sort of people attuned to such subtleties.
The "sort of people" are art dealers who can BS richies into believing
that they are sensitive enough to recognize genius in painted stripes
as opposed to stripes on a designer bed sheet.
>They seem to say,"You are clever because you see that simplicity is never easily achieved."
Come off it guys, these paintings don't say a damn thing and visually
their nothing-dom.
>Failing to do so, we may resent Kelly for his elegance and thereby underrate him, which people have done for half a century while he has stayed remarkably unaffected, cultivating his exalted little patch of Eden as the art world has screamed and churned around him.
The usual Artspeak apology for a large mass of nothing.
Very pompous descriptions for blind men snipped
>…..Flat and decorative in reproduction, Kelly's reliefs are ultimately physical objects that depend on our movement around them, which they surreptitiously choreograph:….etc…etc.
mdeli
>>>
>>>> You can check this guys web site for true artzy fartzy incompetence.
>>>>...no skill no art
>
>Pfffft what ever Mani. You can stay in your platonic cave forever. And the
>sand box is all yours since you do not play well with others.
>
The mediocrity of your art work shows that about all you can play with
is yourself.
RBrac53660
would move up a notch to the pocket fisherman level maybe.
BTW I take your endorsment as a compliment. I'm artzie fartzie and proud of it
I'm Artzie Fartzie and proud, HEY HEY
I'm Artzie Fartzie and proud, HEY HEY
I'm Artzie Fartzie and proud, HEY HEY
Also in the future could you please make your put downs a little more
entertaining. The "...no skill no art" catch phrase is tired. Perhaps you
should read some Hilton Kramer (who occasionally has a point) or some
Baudelaire (since your stuck in the 19th century) but then again subtance seems
to be a rare commidity at your keyboard.
Yank that chain------------- ;)
mdeli
Romantics began to question the very necessity of acquiring technical
skill. More and more they stressed the importance of aesthetic theory
and denigrated the importance of rote. The first skill appreciably
affected by this was drawing . By the beginning of this century
technical ability itself came under direct theoretical attack, and the
technical deterioration of what is presently considered fine art now
began in earnest.
Even by 1900 this opinion was not as yet very destructive. It was only
when artists who lacked technical skill began to teach that the
damage become apparent. As this century progressed critical judgment
centered on how well a painting conformed to some ever changing
aesthetic theory. The absence of primary skills basic to all painting
of the past now has no weight in a MAA critic's judgments of quality.
The belief , now prevails that technique is a cold unemotional matter
unnecessary to the production of artwork, if not evil. The basic
scientific foundations of drawing and painting technique are
pooh-poohed. Rote teaching of any kind is dogmatically rejected and
replaced by slogans and so-called theories. Only scant mention is
given to what has by now become vestigial knowledge. Art schools
gradually deteriorated into forums for vacuous theoretical discussions
and havens for curious creeds and impractical idealisms, stressing pep
talks about mystical methods for sharpening emotions and increasing
sensitivities rather than places to learn technique and craft.
Students are taught what is best called Modern Art Fundamentalism and
remain totally unaware that there is a whole other modern art world
inhabited by artists who have skill and know there craft. Work by
artists who are popular and have no part in Modern Academic Art BS
They are taught that this work should they come across it is something
out of the past.
...no skill no art
Modern Academic Art is incompetence in search of an idea.
Tired of Modern Art? Check out my web page!
lauri levanto
"mdeli" <hug...@interlog.com> wrote in message
news:3b0d8445...@news.psi.ca...
> By the last quarter of the nineteenth century the purists among the
> Romantics began to question the very necessity of acquiring technical
> skill. More and more they stressed the importance of aesthetic theory
> and denigrated the importance of rote.
To whom do you refer? What is your source.
I have thought that romantics and symbolists appreciated classical
rendering.
The rote learning was saved in Soviet up to 1980's. Still some schools
have it. How do you appreciate the results of Social Realism?
> The first skill appreciably
> affected by this was drawing . By the beginning of this century
> technical ability itself came under direct theoretical attack, and the
> technical deterioration of what is presently considered fine art now
> began in earnest.
Who theoretican you think attacked technical ability? I know some who
ignored it, however.
As I'm not familiar with the US art schools, I'll take your word for the
rest, with a pich of salt, of course.
-lauri
RBrac53660
>rest, with a pich of salt, of course.
>
>-lauri
>
I'm fairly familiar w/ US art schools and in most schools each student has to
do a foundation year that includes on year of drawing no matter there major.
And there are people that do go on to pursue a degree in drawing. And there
better at it then Mani.
mdeli
<lauri....@nokia.com> wrote:
>Nice to read else than reprints from you.
>
>"mdeli" <hug...@interlog.com> wrote in message
>news:3b0d8445...@news.psi.ca...
>> By the last quarter of the nineteenth century the purists among the
>> Romantics began to question the very necessity of acquiring technical
>> skill. More and more they stressed the importance of aesthetic theory
>> and denigrated the importance of rote.
>To whom do you refer? What is your source.
Check out some art history books. The Romantics (I'm referring to the
start in late 18th Century ) stressed emotion and later self
expression.
>I have thought that romantics and symbolists appreciated classical
>rendering.
The Romantics also learned it. The symbolists are a mixed bag.
>The rote learning was saved in Soviet up to 1980's. Still some schools
>have it. How do you appreciate the results of Social Realism?
Some is good some is bad. I presume you consider it all bad because
that's what you learned. Can you name five social realists. China has
some excellent examples, rarely seen.
>
>> The first skill appreciably
>> affected by this was drawing . By the beginning of this century
>> technical ability itself came under direct theoretical attack, and the
>> technical deterioration of what is presently considered fine art now
>> began in earnest.
>Who theoretican you think attacked technical ability? I know some who
>ignored it, however.
It comes to a head with Greenberg. Read some early art magazine for
examples. Of course its not in a sentence directly saying down with
technical ability. However some criticisms of Dali come very close to
saying it.
The results of most art schools show how low technically ability has
come.
Ricardo Pontes
years of drawing skill at work in your website.
>
> I'm fairly familiar w/ US art schools and in most schools each student has
to
> do a foundation year that includes on year of drawing no matter there
major.
> And there are people that do go on to pursue a degree in drawing.
And there
> better at it then Mani.
>
>
Are you better than Mani?
Ricardo Pontes
RBrac53660
my ear off and mail it to you. NOT.
Do you have any facilities to critique other then saying
>As usual Winston, you are talking out of your ass.
That just seems to lack any insight.
>We can see those required
>years of drawing skill at work in your website.
There photographs you nickempoop.
Step up to the post nuclear world and smell the radiation!
lauri levanto
"lauri levanto"
> >Nice to read else than reprints from you.
> >
> >"mdeli" wrote in message
> >
Mani> >> By the last quarter of the nineteenth century the purists among the
> >> Romantics began to question the very necessity of acquiring technical
> >> skill. More and more they stressed the importance of aesthetic theory
> >> and denigrated the importance of rote.
lauri> >To whom do you refer? What is your source.
>
Mani> Check out some art history books. The Romantics (I'm referring to the
> start in late 18th Century ) stressed emotion and later self
> expression.
Did the checking. What has emotions and self-expression to do with aesthetic
theory?
lauri> >I have thought that romantics and symbolists appreciated classical
> >rendering.
Mani> The Romantics also learned it (rendering). The symbolists are a mixed
bag.
Please read about romantics in your first chapter above. I agree about
symbolists.
lauri> >The rote learning was saved in Soviet up to 1980's. Still some
schools
> >have it. How do you appreciate the results of Social Realism?
>
Mani> Some is good some is bad. I presume you consider it all bad because
> that's what you learned. Can you name five social realists. China has
> some excellent examples, rarely seen.
>
Couple of them have been my teachers. I can't give five names, my computer
lacks Russian keyboad.
Surprising how few are good. As you see mere skill is not enough.
Most often it does not harm either, I admit.
Mani> >> The first skill appreciably
> >> affected by this was drawing . By the beginning of this century
> >> technical ability itself came under direct theoretical attack, and the
> >> technical deterioration of what is presently considered fine art now
> >> began in earnest.
lauri> >Who theoretican you think attacked technical ability? I know some
who
> >ignored it, however.
>
Mani> It comes to a head with Greenberg. Read some early art magazine for
> examples. Of course its not in a sentence directly saying down with
> technical ability.
My point. I do not like Greenberg either. But 'direct attack' appears to
be your projection.
Mani >However some criticisms of Dali come very close to
> saying it.
Reading between lines is like seeing art in spite of rendering.
> The results of most art schools show how low technically ability has
> come.
No objection, but does it prove the artistic quality went with it?
-lauri
--
Speak the truth, only truth, but never the whole truth.
(Martti Saarikangas, manager of Kvaerner shiyards)
Misty Ayed
says...
>Step up to the post nuclear world and smell the radiation!
I think that's his problem - he already did.
Maybe he has too much radon in his living space?
Or maybe he soaks in the sun too long (maybe
not enough?). He and Mani could both do with
a good head soaking...cleansing!
Marilyn
Mani proclaims:
>
>
> > The results of most art schools show how low technically ability has
> > come.
>
When was the last time you visited an art school in the USA or Canada. When was
the last time you have been to a grad show?
The technical ability of students is outstanding, but it is a NEW technology
dealing with NEW materials, equipment and electronics that you never dreamt of
in your dusty old art school days. Move on.
mdeli
>Did the checking. What has emotions and self-expression to do with aesthetic
>theory?
Nothing much in my opinion.
>lauri> >The rote learning was saved in Soviet up to 1980's. Still some
>schools have it. How do you appreciate the results of Social Realism?
>>
>Mani> Some is good some is bad. I presume you consider it all bad because
>> that's what you learned. Can you name five social realists. China has
>> some excellent examples, rarely seen.
>>
>Couple of them have been my teachers. I can't give five names, my computer
>lacks Russian keyboad. Surprising how few are good.
Not surprising at all. Look at the crap in the modern sections of
museums.
>As you see mere skill is not enough.
Indeed skill is only a foundation, but anything lacking skill isn't
any good at all.
mdeli
>Mani proclaims:
>> > The results of most art schools show how low technically ability has
>> > come.
>When was the last time you visited an art school in the USA or Canada. When was
>the last time you have been to a grad show?
I look frequently. I also see the results on many web pages.
>The technical ability of students is outstanding,
Lets see your work and we will see the standards by which you make
this conclusion. I suspect that the work which the average
Picassoholics on this conference show meet with your standard of
excellence.
>but it is a NEW technology dealing with NEW materials, equipment and electronics that you never dreamt of
>in your dusty old art school days. Move on.
I doubt that you know much of anything thats going on in computer
graphics. About one minute of Toy Story makes the last forty years of
Modern Academic Art look stupid while you are stuck with a room full
of over-ripe bananas.
lauri levanto
> "lauri levanto"wrote:
<...>
>>Surprising how few (social realists)are good.
>
> Not surprising at all. Look at the crap in the modern sections of
> museums.
They did't have a modern section in Eremitage.
I had to go to Sweden to see even Malewich and Tatlin.
Do you know a museum with good example of social realism?
-lauri
mdeli
praised as masterpieces but range between third rate and ridiculous on
a technical level. It comprises about 95% of the stuff that presently
hangs in the modern sections of museums.
Listed below in are several main categories of MAA and some top
artists who fit bill.
NO SKILL REALISM:
Picasso's portraits, Bonnard, Cezanne, Marin, Rivers, Hockney, Katz
and Expressionist schmierers, and its greatest exponent, Matisse.,
ABSTRACTIFIED HACK REALISM:
starting with cubism, Morandi, de Kooning, Picasso, Matisse, Leger
CRITICALLY GLORIFIED SECOND RATE CARTOONS:
Guernica and Picasso's attempts at drawing.
STRIPED TEXTILE DESIGN:
Mondrian, Newman, Rothko
KINDERGARTEN DESIGN:
Kandinski, Albers, Twombley, Diebenkorn, Still
CREATIVE SENILITY POSING AS CHILDISHNESS
Matisse, Guston, Twombly, Johns
TALENTED CHIMPANZEE COMPETITION:
Most Abstract expressionism, Kline, Pollock, de Kooning
mdeli
artists I like because I little to add to those already written. I
have mentioned scores of artists I like and for the most part left it
at that. My aim here is to criticize Modern Academic Art Theology and
artists who I feel are vastly over-rated. In light of the almost
completely one-sided ecstatic positive praise expressed over the last
50 years, more often than not couched in inflated prose which amounts
to little more than Gibberish. I feel that it is time to hear the
voice of the other side.
Besides saying " I like it" in as many words as possible, Art can be
criticized from a technical stand point up to a degree. I could do
this more completely here where it possible to compare images on this
conference. I have done this on my web site and believe it is the best
critical approach to matters which are very subjective like painting.
This is especially effective when accompanied by satire, funny and
cynical, in both words and image.
My aim is to convince people to take a close look at artwork and
compare. I urge them to make their judgments about the merit of what
they see in front of them, rather than what they have repeatedly been
told to imagine.
That is why I so often point out Matisse's flippers, Cézanne's
schmiery badly drawn nudes and portraits and Picasso's enlarged oil
cartoons, not to mention the practically-nothing-abstractions of
Rothko, Pollock and de Kooning etc.
I've received many compliments about my web site that confirm my
approach. Most boil down to saying, "its about time." This is exactly
the gist of the statement I'm trying to encourage. Most but not all
here have other aims with which I happen to disagree. If this is from
their point of view very negative; so be it.
Dale Ford
Who is the greatest living artist in your opinion? Or since that is
probably close to impossible to answer, who do you admire (alive).
Dale
Dale Ford
you are totally negative, and boring.....................
Dale
RBrac53660
Sharon Barcone
> Modern Academic Art comprises those Artworks which are fashionably
> praised as masterpieces but range between third rate and ridiculous on
> a technical level. It comprises about 95% of the stuff that presently
> hangs in the modern sections of museums.
>
> Listed below in are several main categories of MAA and some top
> artists who fit bill.
>
> Most Abstract expressionism, Kline, Pollock, de Kooning
>
>
> ...no skill no art
>
> Modern Academic Art is incompetence in search of an idea.
>
> Tired of Modern Art? Check out my web page!
>
> http://www.interlog.com/~hugod/
I must object to including Pollack in any category that includes the word
"Talented". Anyone who has first hand knowledge of an alcoholic knows that
all they are ever concerned with is the next drink. And even if the
individual had any talents, they would never reach the surface to be
expressed.
sharon
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Dale Ford
every time he hears the name :-)
Dale
Dale Ford
RBrac53660
>every time he hears the name :-)
>Dale
Well why do U think I said it? He is cartoon delux. The sad thing is often
times he does have a point about people like mani when he cartoons people like
mani.............KKK....whom know everything
masobach
Forget positive and negative (that's how we English speakers spell it)
anything new would be a delight. How many years has Mani been ranting
about Matisse's flippers? How many times has he typed the word
"schmier"? Imagine those letters on his keyboard completely worn away!
yours,
Masobach
Dale Ford <bdf...@mb.sympatico.ca> wrote in message news:<3B604331...@mb.sympatico.ca>...
RBrac53660
>Look at Mani's work as presented on his website,
>(I'm sure I saw him post the URL somewhere!)
>to understand his critique of these artists better.
>It comes from his unique perception and vantage point.
>
What is that vantage point? Sitting in water closet IMHO
mdeli
>OK we have heard this before. Let's go at this from a different angle.
>Who is the greatest living artist in your opinion? Or since that is
>probably close to impossible to answer, who do you admire (alive).
>Dale
I admire charlatans who make millions. I also admire Charlatans in the
Fox class who imitate charlatans and at least can make a living unlike
the mass of average paupers who produces similar crap which is no
worse. I really like Twombly and Christo, unless he is already
avant-gone. I don't like anyone who is already avant-gone.
The more artists who don't know their craft, the more success for
those who do.
Dale Ford
Dale
Dale Ford
mdeli wrote:
> Dale Ford wrote:
>
> >OK we have heard this before. Let's go at this from a different angle.
> >Who is the greatest living artist in your opinion? Or since that is
> >probably close to impossible to answer, who do you admire (alive).
> >Dale
>
> I admire charlatans who make millions. I also admire Charlatans in the
> Fox class who imitate charlatans and at least can make a living unlike
> the mass of average paupers who produces similar crap which is no
> worse. I really like Twombly and Christo, unless he is already
> avant-gone. I don't like anyone who is already avant-gone.
>
That is so Darrell of you :-)
Dale
Dale Ford
of me.
What I meant to say was that was so Warhol of you. Mani you are so avant
guard ya don't even know it........
Dale
Dale Ford
influence of Klee in a couple of pieces, but I didn't want to worry him
about it. ( Then again I am hung up on composition so I am bound to
notice these things.)
Dale
Marilyn wrote:
> Oh yeah, why not Chagall?
> Look at Mani's work as presented on his website,
> (I'm sure I saw him post the URL somewhere!)
> to understand his critique of these artists better.
> It comes from his unique perception and vantage point.
>
> Marilyn
Dale Ford
that).....except in this case we need to say Klee.
Now Mani go get me a shubbery...........Klee.
Dale
RBrac53660
if he knows what his favorite color is? Hmmmm
>Kind of like Monty Python and the knights that go Niieet ( or how does one
>write
>that).....except in this case we need to say Klee.
>
>Now Mani go get me a shubbery...........Klee.
>Dale
>
Marilyn
> >Oh yeah, why not Chagall?
> >Look at Mani's work as presented on his website,
> >(I'm sure I saw him post the URL somewhere!)
> >to understand his critique of these artists better.
> >It comes from his unique perception and vantage point.
> >
>
> What is that vantage point? Sitting in water closet IMHO
>
He does use the toilet paper motif quite a lot.
yawn...
Dale Ford
RBrac53660
mdeli
>
>I must object to including Pollack in any category that includes the word
>"Talented". Anyone who has first hand knowledge of an alcoholic knows that
>all they are ever concerned with is the next drink. And even if the
>individual had any talents, they would never reach the surface to be
>expressed.
I wrote:
>> TALENTED CHIMPANZEE COMPETITION:
>> Most Abstract expressionism, Kline, Pollock, de Kooning
Jackson Pollock, like his other famous MAA (Modern Academic Art)
contemporaries, could not draw and he had no technical finesse. Yet he
had just about everything that counts as far as MAA is concerned. He
made the right connections and he knew how to steady his nerves enough
in order to audaciously hang his works with masterpiece pretenses.
Originality is the rallying point for new art movements, and yet
Pollock's paintings call for an entirely different view of
originality. Here we have a type of work, the likes of which have
always been produced by kindergarten students, on house painter's drip
sheets and by designers of floor covering.. Critics, however, assure
us that Pollock is really an inventor, that he alone must receive the
credit for being first. Even to say that Pollock was the first artist
who was a splattered is probably a mistake, but history has certainly
taken note of the fact that Pollock was first person ever with enough
chutzpah to exhibit pure splat and be called a great artist for that
reason.
Pollock's drawing and technique is so bad that it conforms to the
put-on quality necessary for successful Modern Academic Art. The only
really valuable thing in a Pollock is the signature. If that turned
out to be fake we would be faced with garbage.
Remember, Chimpanzees can't sign their pictures, while Pollock ahd the
talent to do so. Fox also managed to sign his chimpanzee competition.
Of course he is a commercial failure compared to Pollock.
Chris
Sharon Barcone wrote:
>
> I must object to including Pollack in any category that includes the word
> "Talented". Anyone who has first hand knowledge of an alcoholic knows that
> all they are ever concerned with is the next drink. And even if the
> individual had any talents, they would never reach the surface to be
> expressed.
>
Hmm, I don't know about that, I've met some very prolific and productive
drunks in my time....and, FWIW, don't you consider Dylan Thomas or Tennessee
Williams any good? Sinclair Lewis? Edgar Allen Poe ? In other fields, there's
always folks like Ulysses Grant, or Canada's own John A. McDonald, and of
course Doc Holliday....
Just came across an intriguing site at http://www.dipsomania.com/trivia.htm ;
with other interesting historical oddities attributable to alcohol, like the
Boston Tea Party (and where would we be without that?).
Cheers;
Chris
Sharon Barcone
obsession for alcohol. I realize there are the so-called functional
alcoholics but I do not believe they actually ever reach their full
potential.
sharon
"Chris" <bro...@ns.sympatico.ca> wrote in message
news:3B65FFB5...@ns.sympatico.ca...