Look I started a Thread!
kfuz...@tinet.ie
I was thinking:
A) How Major Fashion Designers Prevent English Soccer Wives and
Girfreinds from Wearing their Clothes. Which is Ironic. Does this Make
Posh a Failure?
B) Where is Father Des?
C) The E-Voting Machines - I Don't Vote so is it a Waste of My Taxes?
D) Will the Shuttle Blow Up?
any other suggestions?
Donald O'Sullivan
Well, no you haven't. You have just started a prick. I am supplying a
line. If some other little prick takes it up, THEN it becomes a thread.
Si
kfuz...@tinet.ie wrote:
> Suggestions for a topic now is all I need.
>
> I was thinking:
>
> A) How Major Fashion Designers Prevent English Soccer Wives and
> Girfreinds from Wearing their Clothes. Which is Ironic. Does this Make
> Posh a Failure?
>
She's still the poster girl for confrontational irony.
> B) Where is Father Des?
>
Termial cantillionitis the last I saw.
> C) The E-Voting Machines - I Don't Vote so is it a Waste of My Taxes?
This one will shortly be in Berties Kites-I-have-flown collection,
along with: Concentration camps for illegal immigrants, Island wide
broadband the and leading the information economy, the national
stadium.....
>
> D) Will the Shuttle Blow Up?
>
[Resist....resist.... you salavate you want but you must rrrrresist.]
> any other suggestions?
At least there will always be 66. England, when it comes to penalties,
are a bunch of Molyneauxs.
Pissing for France....undoped urine sales soar every July. Any takers?
Si
"Bog snorkler extraordinaire"
kateh
This just makes me sad.
>> D) Will the Shuttle Blow Up?
>
> [Resist....resist.... you salavate you want but you must rrrrresist.]
Please, tell me no. There've been enough things blowing up around
here.....since last Thursday night.
I hate mid-week 4ths........
>> any other suggestions?
>
> Pissing for France....undoped urine sales soar every July. Any takers?
I'm not sure. Donald stated that the third poster in a thread is "a little
prick", since you were third, but didn't answer him.....I think you're safe
and I'm it.
Kate(but damn it, they act like.... NO ONE's Gonna Find Out!!!)H
How stupid.....sighhhhhhh
Doc Aay
> How stupid.....sighhhhhhh
>
Not only that, but they whine that everybody else is doing it when they are
caught, or accuse Armstrong of doing it when he isn't.
Fine specimens.
Doc
kateh
Yet, I find it comforting that being stupid.......isn't TOTALLY an American
thing.
KateH :)
claire....@ntlworld.com
Donald O'Sullivan wrote:
> kfuz...@tinet.ie wrote:
>
> Well, no you haven't. You have just started a prick. I am supplying a
a Coke addiction?
kateh
Donald O'Sullivan
No but an interesting study in culture and language.
WhiteWolf - "An Mac Tíre Bán" <rayh(removespamblocker>@iol.ie>
>Suggestions for a topic now is all I need.
>
>I was thinking:
>
>A) How Major Fashion Designers Prevent English Soccer Wives and
>Girfreinds from Wearing their Clothes. Which is Ironic. Does this Make
>Posh a Failure?
>
>B) Where is Father Des?
>
Sending out an S-O-S!!!
>C) The E-Voting Machines - I Don't Vote so is it a Waste of My Taxes?
>
Only if you pay them!
>D) Will the Shuttle Blow Up?
>
Not this time!
>any other suggestions?
A discussion about contempary vs traditoinal art?
Ray
--
***************************************************
I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences
attending too much liberty than to those attending
too small a degree of it. - Thomas Jefferson
***************************************************
Email : ray(removeSPAM)@eirefirst.com
Website: http://www.eirefirst.com
Forum : http://www.eirefirst.com/smf
News : http://www.eirefirst.com/plog
***************************************************
kfuz...@tinet.ie
WhiteWolf - "An Mac Tíre Bán" <rayh(removespamblocker>@iol.ie> wrote:
> On 4 Jul 2006 20:00:04 -0700, kfuz...@tinet.ie wrote:
>
> A discussion about contempary vs traditoinal art?
Nice one Ray! Excellent suggestion.
I will have a think about this and follow-up when I have more time. In
the meantime it anybody wants to talk about Irish art then do it here.
WhiteWolf - "An Mac Tíre Bán" <rayh(removespamblocker>@iol.ie>
don't hold your breath Unki....
Si
Talking about art is a bit like picking your nose with gloves on. I was
mad into the painting and drawing when I was a nipper. Technically I
was fecking great at it. I gave it up when I realized I had no
imagination. I look back now and realise that it wasn't a lack of
imagination it was a lack of understanding about life. Art is
meaningless without context. A comfortable adolecent Dub with no major
windswept and interesting social, mental or physical afflictions has
all the context of a blank sheet of paper. I was a snob. I loved
painting. Still do. Haven't the heart to go back to doing it yet. Me
bro calls it Gaugaining. You need to get through yer boring career
phase before you can get shit faced painting in Tahiti. Contempary v
traditional is a poor argument to make. Do you like chicken or beef?
Neither in my case. Caravagio was a 'traditional' artist. He was a
mannerist and kicked off the whole dutch masters scene. Brilliantly
rendered paintings with exquisite detail and skill. Probably far better
than anything that had gone before. The apex of what would be
considered 'traditional'. Yet in the context of the of the early 17th
century his stuff must have been more explosive than any cut open cow
in a tank of formaldehide. Painting religious subjects in contemporary
clothing using 'street' people for models including a renowned whore
for the 'death of the virgin'. His homoerotic pieces. Including himself
as the lamp holder in the taking of christ. All calculated stuff. Yet
now we'll slap him on the chocolate box along side those other rebel
artists the impressionists. I got over them once me acne cleared up and
me voice dropped. Although I will say that given his encroaching
blindness Monets water lillies stuff is pure pathos. In that vein I
loved Osbornes & Leechs' stuff. Particularly when they started to vere
into expressionism. Like leeches Seaweed or Railway embankment. At the
time I regarded it as a mildly shmeful cheesey affliction. It wasn't,
my love of Jim Fitzpatrick's celtic stuff was embarrasingly so (NCAD
flung my cheesy derivative arse out thank god). Roderick O'Conor and
Jack Yeats also yanked my expressionist chain back then. However back
then I couldn't follow their decent into abstraction. Back then i was
more Ballagh than Bacon. Louis leBrocquy was very clever (I even copied
his Becket sketch out in portfolio to see if I could render that well)
but he didn't move me. I was, I admit, a sentimentalist. All change
now. Paul Henry left me cold then. Now having been out of the place for
so long I find his stuff captivating, Keating is our very own Leni
Riefenstahl, Ray I am sure loves his stuff. Now I find I like the
abstract stuff more. Weird. Maybe I am finally growing up. Or at last
I'm getting it or a life.
A better question is what is traditional art and what is contemporary?
Is the metric content or technique? Should we all just stick to cheesey
LeTene and romanesque motifs to assert our Oirishness?
Si
"Bog snorkler extraordinaire"
kfuz...@tinet.ie
> Caravagio was a 'traditional' artist. He was a
> mannerist and kicked off the whole dutch masters scene. Brilliantly
> rendered paintings with exquisite detail and skill. Probably far better
> than anything that had gone before.
It was a quantum leap in terms of painting for that time. Have you seen
The Taking of Christ? The painting is huge. Hard to beleive it hung on
some preists wall for decades and he had no idea what it was. Bet then
again it helps to be an ignorant if you want to join the preisthood.
>The apex of what would be
> considered 'traditional'.
Vermeer for me would represent that. But that just me picking my nose
with my glove.
> Yet in the context of the of the early 17th
> century his stuff must have been more explosive than any cut open cow
> in a tank of formaldehide.
Caravagio was painting in the 15th century as well, which makes it even
more impressive. If you look at the work of his contemporaries such as
Carracci, there was most certainly a new dynamic in painting happening
around then, oul bonkers Caravagio just blew them all out of the water.
> Yet
> now we'll slap him on the chocolate box along side those other rebel
> artists the impressionists.
I can't imagine a Caravagio on a cholcolate box. What flavour... Rum,
Sodomy and Lash?
> Although I will say that given his encroaching
> blindness Monets water lillies stuff is pure pathos.
Them catheracts were a blessing really.
> Paul Henry left me cold then. Now having been out of the place for
> so long I find his stuff captivating,
Me too. Took me years to wise up to how good his stuff his. He paints
the cold air and wind. The scenes on Achill Island are pure sensory as
much as visual.
>Now I find I like the
> abstract stuff more. Weird. Maybe I am finally growing up. Or at last
> I'm getting it or a life.
I started out more into Dada and Constructivism and now my taste in art
is very much catholic. I am sick of the whole contemporary art scene.
Sean Scully...eh...nah. He is a bloke from Inchcore who paints squares
in different colours.
> A better question is what is traditional art and what is contemporary?
or what represents both? Maybe if there is another SCI-Con we should
have it at the National Gallery in Dublin and work all this out.
(super post, well done.)
kfuz...@tinet.ie
> Caravagio was painting in the 15th century as well,
oops sorry, I meant 16th.
There is a very nice selection of Paul Henry paintings here:
http://www.achill247.com/artists/Paul_Henry.html
You can see he followed the Dutch school of landscape painting in terms
of the 1/3 terrain, 2/3 sky composition.
At the moment I think I like "In Connemara" the best. In Ireland our
towering, monolithic clouds compensate for our not so tall mountains.
It's also a daring composition as the central cloud and mountain breaks
the rules, but the little cottege on the far right brings the whole
painting home. Try putting your finger on the cottege on the right and
see how the whole painting then looks very average.
http://www.achill247.com/artists/Paul_Henry_Connemara.html
That's the kind of little touch which makes the difference between a
pretty picture and a great work of art.
Donald O'Sullivan
kateh
> There is a very nice selection of Paul Henry paintings here:
> http://www.achill247.com/artists/Paul_Henry.html
Thanks, Unki!
> You can see he followed the Dutch school of landscape painting in terms
> of the 1/3 terrain, 2/3 sky composition.
>
> At the moment I think I like "In Connemara" the best. In Ireland our
> towering, monolithic clouds compensate for our not so tall mountains.
> It's also a daring composition as the central cloud and mountain breaks
> the rules, but the little cottege on the far right brings the whole
> painting home. Try putting your finger on the cottege on the right and
> see how the whole painting then looks very average.
>
> http://www.achill247.com/artists/Paul_Henry_Connemara.html
I'm very into clouds, at the moment, and see your point. When we're done
w/the contemporary/traditional discussion can we go on to the
illustrator-vs-artist discussion? I just don't see the difference.
Kate(who drove into (not over) a Maxfield Parish landscape last week)H
Si
kfuz...@tinet.ie wrote:
> Si wrote:
>
> > Caravagio was a 'traditional' artist. He was a
> > mannerist and kicked off the whole dutch masters scene. Brilliantly
> > rendered paintings with exquisite detail and skill. Probably far better
> > than anything that had gone before.
>
> It was a quantum leap in terms of painting for that time. Have you seen
> The Taking of Christ? The painting is huge. Hard to beleive it hung on
> some preists wall for decades and he had no idea what it was. Bet then
> again it helps to be an ignorant if you want to join the preisthood.
>
Yup got to see it in the national gallery a few years back. Even have
the poster of it on my wall. It was the Jays that had it. They were
probably being too ascetic and intellectual to be bothered with such
paltry things as art. Pass de port der James.
> >The apex of what would be
> > considered 'traditional'.
>
> Vermeer for me would represent that. But that just me picking my nose
> with my glove.
>
Ah, you are a child of the light. This chicken undercover goth ran to
darker fare.
> > Yet in the context of the of the early 17th
> > century his stuff must have been more explosive than any cut open cow
> > in a tank of formaldehide.
>
> Caravagio was painting in the 15th century as well, which makes it even
> more impressive. If you look at the work of his contemporaries such as
> Carracci, there was most certainly a new dynamic in painting happening
> around then, oul bonkers Caravagio just blew them all out of the water.
>
> > Yet
> > now we'll slap him on the chocolate box along side those other rebel
> > artists the impressionists.
>
> I can't imagine a Caravagio on a cholcolate box. What flavour... Rum,
> Sodomy and Lash?
>
Funny enough most of his still life studies are virtuoso stuff.
Commonly found on trivets, place mats and boxes chocolate Brazil nuts.
http://www.abcgallery.com/C/caravaggio/caravaggio28.html
That was his early stuff. Before he had a life, shagged boys roared at
bishops and got into dueling with swords.
> > Paul Henry left me cold then. Now having been out of the place for
> > so long I find his stuff captivating,
>
> Me too. Took me years to wise up to how good his stuff his. He paints
> the cold air and wind. The scenes on Achill Island are pure sensory as
> much as visual.
>
Ta for the links. Tis good to gawk. At the risk of getting prosaic the
thing I like about Herny's stuff is the you can almost smell the air. I
feel like buttoning me coat up just looking at In Connemara. An easy
trick to achieve painting frosty French haystacks a bit special
painting the landscape of the Whesht (again context..would we feel the
same about Henry if we weren't recovering Irish self loathers?). He had
a couple of neat tricks that I tried. The base color for the Henry sky
is a pale yellow then lay up the blue and white... well cool. The other
one is to break the rendering rule and outline away. Something most of
the other Irish artist seem to do a lot of. True he had a gift for
composition beyond the ordinairy and wonderful way of maintaining a
human scale to give ye the 'awe' factor., Even in his pokey wee
paintings.
> >Now I find I like the
> > abstract stuff more. Weird. Maybe I am finally growing up. Or at last
> > I'm getting it or a life.
>
> I started out more into Dada and Constructivism and now my taste in art
> is very much catholic. I am sick of the whole contemporary art scene.
> Sean Scully...eh...nah. He is a bloke from Inchcore who paints squares
> in different colours.
>
Ah no not for me thanks. Abstract expressionism is it for me.
Constructionist stuff ain't my bag. (/pseude) Tis a bit to DIY home
improvement show (/pseude). I remember going to that Art Gallery on
Parnell square (what the hell is it called these days: Huge Lane Met?).
They had this massive canvas there. It was called White Void Upheld. It
was a Sadolin painting. It did what it said on the tin. T'was a big
white canvas with a green border. WTF? I am sure somebody could rabbit
on to me about the post-industruial commentary it was making and such
but it would be a piss poor story and cold at that. I like stories.
Most decent artists body of work tells their story. I think I only
recently got old enough to read the later bits. That or quitting the
binge drinking.
> > A better question is what is traditional art and what is contemporary?
>
> or what represents both? Maybe if there is another SCI-Con we should
> have it at the National Gallery in Dublin and work all this out.
>
Excellent stuff. We can cast our mortgages at Fitz's (or what ever they
are calling it this year) for a cup of coffee and break out the black
polo necks. I'm there.
Si
"Bog snorkler extraordinaire"
Si
kateh wrote:
> When we're done
> w/the contemporary/traditional discussion can we go on to the
> illustrator-vs-artist discussion? I just don't see the difference.
Neither did I when I was a nipper, hence my embarrassing early Jim
Fitzpatrick fixation. What's the modern argo, Graphic design? Therein
lies your explaination perhaps. Illustration is an art but so often it
is a business. Even when it is clearly in its artistic mode it is more
often than not clever rather than moving. You look at it and think damn
that is such a cool idea. You rarely feel moved by it. That's why me
and many of the spotty brethern were (and continue to be I believe)
into JF. We looked at all his romanesque frippery and celtic
caricatures and thought ourselves clever for following his melding of
ancient Irish decorative styles and modern comic book conventions. It
was just emotional immaturity. There is a technical virtuosity in both
that one can appreciate but I think the difference in art is that there
is an ineffable emotional hook too. True some people can get a devine
emotional hit from illustrations but then there are some people who get
such a hit from Manolo Blahniks.
Si
"Bog snorkler extraordinaire"
Si
Donald O'Sullivan wrote:
> Do you dot your 'i' when writing with small circles?
I do I do... then I put a couple of wee horns, a smigeen and wee forked
tail on em too.
What does it all mean?
Si
"Bog snorkler extraordinaire"
kfuz...@tinet.ie
> He had
> a couple of neat tricks that I tried. The base color for the Henry sky
> is a pale yellow then lay up the blue and white... well cool.
If I tried that in transparent watercolours I would get a green sky.
In fact I shy away from nearly all yellows except Orche. They are all
too opaque in WCs. The only other yellow I like is actually marketed as
a gold (Quinichrodine Gold) which is a pigment designed originally for
the auto paint industry, but is absolutely the most beautiful
yellow/gold I have seen and never goes muddy when it comes into contact
with complementary colours the way Cad Yellow often does.
>The other
> one is to break the rendering rule and outline away. Something most of
> the other Irish artist seem to do a lot of.
Never notice that before but you are right.
>True he had a gift for
> composition beyond the ordinairy and wonderful way of maintaining a
> human scale to give ye the 'awe' factor., Even in his pokey wee
> paintings.
There was a English painter called Francis Walker from the same ear. He
did a few tours of Ireland and he managed to paint Irish peasent folk a
lot less romantic and wind-swept and more how these poor souls really
were. He did one of women picking spuds on a hill in Donegal and it's
as far from the Anglo-Irish (living in mansions with servants) and
their romantic view of the Irish peasentry. It's just a painting of
some ragged girls who look like old women trying avoid starvation.
Donald O'Sullivan
Si, who was that lassie who got to you - you and your artistic bent. I
need to know. I design systems.
Si
Donald O'Sullivan wrote:
>
>
> Si, who was that lassie who got to you - you and your artistic bent. I
> need to know. I design systems.
I was bottle fed.
Si
"Bog snorkler extraordinaire"
John P. Mullen
Was that Guinness or Bushnells?
:-)
John Mullen
Donald O'Sullivan
> Donald O'Sullivan wrote:
>
>>
>>Si, who was that lassie who got to you - you and your artistic bent. I
>>need to know. I design systems.
>
>
>
> I was bottle fed.
Ahhh..
>
> Si
>
> "Bog snorkler extraordinaire"
>