Friday, June 26, 2009

9: Why don't they call my painting ART?

Art is one of those typical philosophical issues that leads to endless debates. Don't blame yourself if you ever got involved in one. The debate is as old as philosphy. Homer and Hesiod themselves raised the question of the source of the artist’s inspiration, which they attributed to divine power.

There we go....the artist as al person with connections to special sources we dont have. Plato does not himself assign a special name to what we call 'art'; for him they belong in the more general class of “craft” (techne), which includes all skills in making or doing, from woodcraft to statecraft. Maybe a second anchorpoint.....craftmanship.

And if the artist inspired by the Muses is like a diviner in not knowing what he is doing , he may have a kind of insight that goes beyond ordinary knowledge, according to Plato. His madness (mania) may be possession by a divinity that inspires him to truth.

Maybe we have a few nice ingredients for making an artist now: connection with special (divine) sources, craftmanship and characteristics of a diviner in translating special insights into his work.

The early church Fathers were somewhat doubtful of beauty and the arts: They feared that a keen interest in earthly things might endanger the soul, whose true vocation lies elsewhere,

especially since the literature, drama, and visual art they were acquainted with was closely associated with the pagan cultures of Greece and Rome.

But despite the danger of idolatry, sculpture and painting became accepted as legitimate aids to piety, and literature became accepted as part of education in the liberal arts. Because the masses couldnt read or write the gothic windows became the predecessor of our modern comicbooks.

The Renaissance was a special case. There the debate started about which are was more art than other arts. Painting was definitely a winner here.

This definitely had something to do with the fact that in a painting you could imitate reality in the best possible way, better than in a sculpture or in words of a poem.

Rationalism with its belief in clear and distinct ideas brought the hope that we could formulate the rules by which something was called art or beautiful.

It hoped to find a more solid, a priori, foundation by deduction from a basic self-evident axiom, such as the principle that art is imitation of nature—where nature comprised the universal, the normal, the essential, the characteristic, the ideal.

We see that never ending philosophical quest here at work, the search for that definition, for that special attribute which makes an object an work of art. What is that special property, which makes something an art-object.

The British empiricists chose another strategy. In the Baconian tradition of empiricism they were greatly interested in the psychology of art (though they were not merely psychologists), especially the creative process and the effects of art upon the beholder.

By assigning to the problems of aesthetic judgment the major part of his third Critique (The Critique of Judgment, 1790), Kant became the first modern philosopher to make his aesthetic theory an integral part of a philosophic system.

Schiller in the remarkable Briefe Ă¼ber die ästhetische Erzieung des Menschen (“Letters on the Aesthetic Education of Man,” 1793–1795), developed a neo-Kantian view of art and beauty as the medium through which humanity (and the human individual) advances from a sensuous to a rational, and therefore fully
human, stage of existence.

Here we may have a fourth ingredient to make a good artist: art as a means to inmprove our human existence, to reach a higher level. That fits in quite nicely with our the other ingredients: connection with special (divine) sources, craftmanship and characteristics of a diviner in translating special insights into his work.

And then we go all out romantic. The romantics generally conceived of art as essentially the expression of the artist’s personal emotions.

A new version of the cognitive view of art becomes dominant in the concept of the imagination as a faculty of immediate insight into truth, distinct from, and perhaps superior to, reason and understanding—the artist’s special gift.

The idea of the work of art as being, in some sense (in some one of many possible senses), a symbol, a sensuous embodiment of a spiritual meaning, though old in essence, as we have seen, came into a new prominence in the romantic period.

The missing link???
A playful man, Marcel Duchamp challenged conventional thought about artistic processes and art marketing, not so much by writing, but through subversive actions such as dubbing a urinal "art" and naming it "Fountain". (1917)

And thus we arrive at the end of our journey in our search of understanding what is art. Duchamp proved that the qualifying characteristic was not beauty. Maybe the qualifying factor is one of the other ingredients...the artist tells us a special truth, or maybe he shows a special insight, which we, ordinary people dont have.

A last resort is the idea of Wittgenstein, that our search for that special quality which makes an object a work of art, is just a philosophical illusion. When we look at all things we call art, we see that they have properties in common, like children in a large family have. They are in some respects the same and yet all different.

In other words, there is no such thing as a clear definition of art and yet the most beautiful thing of art is, that we all know what art is. And did it ever occur to you that the word 'artist' isnt the name of a profession at all. It is a title, a kind of a degree of being.

The Discussion

[13:30] Paula Dix: isnt like music, we cant say when simple sound turn into music, but we all know what music is?
[13:31] Qwark Allen: yes
[13:31] Gemma Cleanslate: and did they apply the same to music as art??
[13:31] herman Bergson: Music is a special kind of art...
[13:32] oola Neruda: all of the examples that herman gave... had different "qualities"...and those qualities reflected the time and place where they were created
[13:32] herman Bergson: I think has been functional for a long religious settings and in settings of entertainment
[13:32] Paula Dix: i was reading the class about how religion appeared, and now wonder if we dont have some brain thing that let use recognize art? I know some people are deaf to music
[13:32] herman Bergson: The romantics made it that great expression of emotions
[13:32] oola Neruda: i believe we have to look at each individual piece and bring to it an understanding of that time and place
[13:33] Gemma Cleanslate: and blind to some forms of art
[13:33] herman Bergson: I guess you may be right Paula
[13:33] Paula Dix: yes gemma
[[13:33] herman Bergson: Neurobiological research scans brainactivity when people see things..
[13:33] oola Neruda: art involves a language...that is expressed in color, shape, line etc. instead of in sounds/words
[13:34] oola Neruda: and you learn to speak the language just as you learn to speak a verbal language
[13:34] herman Bergson: That is only a metaphor, oola
[13:34] herman Bergson: I think that what is increasingly important is the efffect of works of art on the central nervous system
[13:34] oola Neruda: when you learn to speak the "language" then do you have the insights that will allow you to be an artist within it
[13:34] herman Bergson: They gonna analyse that definitely
[13:35] Paula Dix: a friend thats a painter says art isnt things, but way of doing things, you make food with art, or anything. He mentions a museum in sweden i think where a lotus race car is shown as art
[13:36] herman Bergson: Well one theory is that not the object is art, but that the beholder makes it art by calling it so
[13:36] oola Neruda: it may be a metaphor but it is also an actual language... kandinsky wrote two books on that... and when you teach art theory you learn it too
[13:36] Paula Dix: oh, herman, i saw recently on tv about a research where when you see beautiful things, the relaxation mechanisms in brain are activate, but when you see ugly, it activates the area that says "run"!
[13:36] Daruma Boa: today its the meaning, the statement u wanna give with the art
[13:37] Daruma Boa: it doesnt have to be beautiful
[13:37] herman Bergson: is strongly associated with an experience of pleasure
[13:37] Paula Dix: oola thats related to semiology, right?
[13:37] oola Neruda: piet mondrian and josef albers are speaking the language but very analyticly...
[13:37] Gemma Cleanslate: hmmm
[13:37] Paula Dix: yes, beauty is just one of the elements
[13:37] oola Neruda: i do not know the word semiology
[13:37] Paula Dix: semiotics, same thing
[13:37] herman Bergson: The problem with the language metaphor is that you dont know where and how it applies..
[13:38] herman Bergson: does art have a grammer for instance?
[13:38] Gemma Cleanslate: hmm
[13:38] Paula Dix: lol some art does :)))
[13:38] herman Bergson: and what is the grammar of medieval art in relation to the grammer of Mondriaan?
[13:38] oola Neruda: when the urinal was presented as art then it was the current set of SOCIETIES requirments for a work to be called art...
[13:39] herman Bergson: To play with this language metaphor suggests that arts has some universal attributes like natural languages have all over the world...
[13:39] oola Neruda: medieval is flat spaces, line and local color, not much interest in balancing a composition and an empahasis on didacticism
[13:39] herman Bergson: words, idiom, grammar, syntax....meaning
[13:39] Paula Dix: i guess there are always two ways of seeing, that from the period the work was made and the other from outside that period. We see the religious painting from renaissance as Big Art, but for them it was more like ads
[13:40] Daruma Boa: or better the artists wants to^
[13:40] Daruma Boa: of course, art want to say something
[13:40] herman Bergson: Yes Paula...
[13:40] Gemma Cleanslate: that is very true
[13:40] oola Neruda: mondrian is speaking about the weights of color...and what proportions of a given intensity or value of color will balance a spot of another one
[13:40] herman Bergson: like artists were primarely craftsmen in those days
[13:40] Paula Dix: or the greek and roman statues in white marble, while they painted them
[13:41] Paula Dix: yes oola, mondrian and that mexican who makes only fat people :))
[13:41] oola Neruda: he broke it down to the simplest shape, a square, so that the shape does not distrat from the measurment of weight of color
[13:41] Paula Dix: sorry, modigliani
[13:41] oola Neruda: modigliani specialized in stylized nudes
[13:41] oola Neruda: not fat people
[13:41] Gemma Cleanslate: lol
[13:41] Paula Dix: mondrian is all about composition
[13:42] Paula Dix: the mexican makes fat people
[13:42] Daruma Boa: *GIGGLES* :)~~~~
[13:42] Paula Dix: modigliani thin people
[13:42] Qwark Allen: 12000 years ago, beeing fat woman was the sexiest thing
[13:42] herman Bergson: My personal opinion is that only neurobiological research will reveal the effects of art on the human being...and why it attracts him
[13:42] oola Neruda: albers used squares for the same the emphasis would be on the color theory... he was intersted in spatial qualities of color as opposed to mondrian's weight of color
[13:42] Gemma Cleanslate: and still in some cultures yes
[13:43] herman Bergson: Yes..skinny women are the proof that you cant feed them well :-)
[13:43] oola Neruda: i hope that answered your question of medieval language vs mondrian
[13:43] Paula Dix: found him, Fernando Botero
[13:43] Qwark Allen: music is not a art that belong only to human specie
[13:43] Daruma Boa: to whom else?
[13:43] Qwark Allen: it is ancestral way of emotinal comunication
[13:43] Paula Dix: and then there is that one with the white painting
[13:43] Qwark Allen: whales for example
[13:43] Daruma Boa: true
[13:44] Qwark Allen: and some other mamals
[13:44] Paula Dix: but whales are singing or talking??
[13:44] herman Bergson: Yes indeed whales are superior composers..never sing the same song twice
[13:44] Paula Dix: it can look to us as singing, like birds, while for them its talking
[13:44] Qwark Allen: that is why, so universal language
[13:44] Daruma Boa: *GIGGLES* :)~~~~
[13:44] Gemma Cleanslate: even the flower pots are fat!!!
[13:44] herman Bergson: a remarkable phenomenon of animal creativity
[13:44] Qwark Allen: whales do sing
[13:44] Qwark Allen: and have diferent songs and metric
[13:44] oola Neruda: that one..the white painting... was done when the atom was being split... taken down to the basic of basic's..the molocule or electrons or ... wave... so the white painting tried to break down the elements in a painting to basics....
[13:44] Qwark Allen: they are cute
[13:44] herman Bergson: there is the language metaphor again....
[13:45] Paula Dix: maybe they wont repeat because its talking, we never talk the same
[13:45] herman Bergson: ^_^
[13:45] Qwark Allen: yes
[13:45] Qwark Allen: always
[13:45] Paula Dix: lol i have a singing whale on our home :)))
[13:45] herman Bergson: It suggests that the work of art has a meaning....
[13:45] oola Neruda: the square ...basic shape.... white ...basic color..... smooth ... basic texture... no line ...
[13:45] oola Neruda: etc
[13:45] Daruma Boa: of course it has
[13:45] herman Bergson: some works have indeed, but all???
[13:45] Paula Dix: oola, and when people dont know about why that painting is all white?
[13:45] oola Neruda: the language, Herman...the language
[13:45] Daruma Boa: no nt the beautiful^^
[13:46] Daruma Boa: everything is art, which has a meaning
[13:46] oola Neruda: they are not looking at it in terms of the time and place where it was made.. and applying their knowledge of the language
[13:46] Daruma Boa: joseph beuys said that
[13:46] Paula Dix: lol Daruma, my friend says "all is art" :)))
[13:46] herman Bergson: Well often the beholder discovers more meaining in a work of art than the maker ever thought of..:-)
[13:46] Daruma Boa: hes right
[13:46] Hello: Ze Novikov donated L$100. Thank you very much for supporting us, it is much appreciated!
[13:46] Daruma Boa: everyone can do
[13:47] Qwark Allen: yes
[13:47] Gemma Cleanslate: that is true of almost any art i think
[13:47] oola Neruda: that is another issue... for the artist to evoke reactions
[13:47] Paula Dix: thats what i think, its much more something between each person and the work
[13:47] Gemma Cleanslate: yse
[13:47] Gemma Cleanslate: also like poetry
[13:47] herman Bergson: another concept of art...
[13:47] Paula Dix: like a sunset... its not art, it just happens, we see the art in it
[13:47] oola Neruda: what about artifacts
[13:47] herman Bergson: That is the difference...
[13:47] oola Neruda: items... beautiful many times... found in archeological sites
[13:47] Paula Dix: duchamp made his Ready Mades in this sense
[13:48] oola Neruda: like king tut
[13:48] CONNIE Eichel: oops, sorry, i must go, sorry :)
[13:48] Gemma Cleanslate: Bye
[13:48] Daruma Boa: bye connie
[13:48] Gemma Cleanslate: connie
[13:48] Ze Novikov: bb
[13:48] Qwark Allen: some years ago i`ve find a sewer cap. now it`s at my living room , and looks like a chinese letter
[13:48] Qwark Allen: nice iron piece
[13:48] Gemma Cleanslate: how big is it?
[13:48] herman Bergson: soem hold that a primairry condition of something to be called art is that it is an artefact...manipulated by a human in whatever way
[13:48] herman Bergson: thence..a sunset isnt ever art
[13:48] oola Neruda: duchamp was saying that the way to look at the object is shape, texture, volume, mass, rhythm...blah blah
[13:49] Paula Dix: yes, you can get a kitchen utensil and put in the living and then its art
[13:49] oola Neruda: not "prettiness"
[13:49] Qwark Allen: 0,5 meter
[13:49] Qwark Allen: 0.25
[13:49] Gemma Cleanslate: lol
[13:49] Qwark Allen: 0,15
[13:49] Qwark Allen: usually people ask where i bought it
[13:49] Qwark Allen: eheheh
[13:49] oola Neruda: what about artifacts
[13:49] herman Bergson: Some cleaners forgot to take that buckets and brooms in a gallery..visitors regarded it as artworks,,
[13:49] Paula Dix: lol
[13:49] Qwark Allen: 0.5x0,25x0,15
[13:49] oola Neruda: or primitive art... or folk art... or outsider art...
[13:50] Gemma Cleanslate: all art
[13:50] oola Neruda: african art...
[13:50] Paula Dix: yes, all is art indeed
[13:50] Gemma Cleanslate: different schools
[13:50] Qwark Allen: and really looks like chinese letter
[13:50] oola Neruda: i do not believe all is art
[13:50] Daruma Boa: oh must go also
[13:50] Paula Dix: bye!
[13:50] Qwark Allen: it`s the perspective and the meaning
[13:50] oola Neruda: baiee
[13:50] herman Bergson: I htink ..most important criterium is: made by man
[13:50] Daruma Boa: herman have beautiful holiday.
[13:50] Paula Dix: and the sunset??
[13:50] Qwark Allen: yes
[13:50] Qwark Allen: ******* Herman *******
[13:50] Gemma Cleanslate: not here thursday???
[13:50] herman Bergson: Ok too :-)
[13:50] Daruma Boa: we will see us in september again^^
[13:51] Daruma Boa: no thurday i am at the theatre
[13:51] herman Bergson: we sure will
[13:51] Gemma Cleanslate: ah
[13:51] Daruma Boa: bye
[13:51] oola Neruda: decorative art...functional art
[13:51] Ze Novikov: bye
[13:51] Gemma Cleanslate: see you sooon anyway
[13:51] Gemma Cleanslate: :-)
[13:51] oola Neruda: commercial art
[13:51] Paula Dix: why not all is art, oola?
[13:51] oola Neruda: illustration
[13:51] oola Neruda: herman said it... it needs to be made by man....
[13:51] Ze Novikov: or industrial design
[13:51] oola Neruda: one might say he interperates
[13:51] herman Bergson: As I said in the beginning...this is gonna be an endless debate ...:-)
[13:51] oola Neruda: yes Ze
[13:52] Paula Dix: there is a guy here who gets pieces of trees and take to museums
[13:52] Paula Dix: highly appreciated
[13:52] oola Neruda: that is like the urinal
[13:52] Paula Dix: well the urinal is man made :)))
[13:52] oola Neruda: what about environmental installations, happenings, conceptial art
[13:52] herman Bergson: Yes...are is created by the art critics, museums etc.
[13:52] Paula Dix: i think it is art when you look at it with art eyes
[13:53] Paula Dix: no matter what is the thing
[13:53] oola Neruda: that is a good point herman... when art becomes only a product to be bought and sold...
[13:53] oola Neruda: advertized, promoted....
[13:53] oola Neruda: like a box of cereal
[13:53] Paula Dix: exact
[13:53] herman Bergson: Yes Paula....that is the opinion that the beholder 'creates' the art in the object
[13:53] Paula Dix: things become art and are demoted from being art all the time
[13:53] Qwark Allen: i`m uploading my sewer art
[13:53] Ze Novikov: lol
[13:54] Paula Dix: this shows the idea of classification is falible
[13:54] Paula Dix: if this word exist :))
[13:54] oola Neruda: and the artist is prevented from evolving his work ... seeing things in a new way...because the gallery has a contract that says he will furnish them with... x ... paintings... and they know what sells
[13:54] oola Neruda: jackson pollock had that problem
[13:54] herman Bergson: which means that the specific response of the central nervous system may be an indication about the quality of an object
[13:54] Paula Dix: lol herman rezz the thing i sent yo
[13:54] Gemma Cleanslate: lol
[13:54] Qwark Allen gave you Qwark art.
[13:54] Qwark Allen: eheheheh
[13:54] Ze Novikov: the Qwark International Museum of Sewer Art
[13:54] Qwark Allen: *~*~rofl*~*~
[13:54] oola Neruda: and he could not even give his wife a ptg for her birthday
[13:54] Gemma Cleanslate: lol
[13:54] oola Neruda: the gallery confiscated it...
[13:55] Paula Dix gave you Duchamp - Fountain - 1917.
[13:55] Paula Dix: perfect Qwark :))
[13:55] Qwark Allen: loool
[13:55] Gemma Cleanslate: fits with the garbage can school of art here in usa
[13:55] herman Bergson: sorry ....too many prims, Paula
[13:55] Gemma Cleanslate: lol
[13:55] Qwark Allen: got to go
[13:55] Qwark Allen: cya soon
[13:55] oola Neruda: baiee quark
[13:55] Qwark Allen: ******* Herman *******
[13:55] Qwark Allen: thank you
[13:55] herman Bergson: Bye Qwark..
[13:55] Qwark Allen: cya oola, ze, justine, paula
[13:56] Qwark Allen: ******* Herman *******
[13:56] Paula Dix: lol ok, its just the Fountain i made for a place called Primtings here
[13:56] oola Neruda: pictographs and petroglyphs... or cave paintings
[13:56] Qwark Allen: :-)
[13:56] Paula Dix: bye!
[13:56] Paula Dix: this one is an Art Detector. this guy put these things on a museum and people went around pushing them
[13:56] Justine Rhapsody: ((sorry I am not keeping up here, lots of RL distractions))
[13:57] herman Bergson: We understand Justine :-)
[13:57] herman Bergson: Ok....
[13:57] oola Neruda: who made it... what was it used for... when was it made... is it still being used for the same thing it was made for... where is it kept then/now...skilled artist or unskilled... etc
[13:57] Ze Novikov: I am off to RL ty herman and everyone a wonderful refreshing summer....
[13:57] oola Neruda: you too ze
[13:58] Gemma Cleanslate: ♥ Thank Youuuuuuuuuu!! ♥
[13:58] Gemma Cleanslate: ok
[13:58] herman Bergson: to put an end to and endless debate, which as such is a nice artistic paradox...I want to thank you all for your participation :-)
[13:58] Gemma Cleanslate: i am pretty sure will be her thursday
[13:58] Paula Dix: :)))
[13:58] oola Neruda: michaelangelo was a commercial artist...
[13:58] Paula Dix: exact
[13:58] herman Bergson: yes...great illustrator, oola ^_^
[13:59] Paula Dix: imagine in 500 years people all fascinated by some of ours tv ads :))
[13:59] herman Bergson: some are real masterpieces..\
[13:59] Paula Dix: sure :)
[14:00] Paula Dix: its all about how you look at them
[14:00] Paula Dix: i love a tv show that shows tv ads from around the planet
[14:00] Paula Dix: i dont know the things being sold, so its just the film for me
[14:00] herman Bergson: yes...when you focuss on the graphic design characteristics for ads become fascinating
[14:01] Paula Dix: i like a lot video art
[14:01] Paula Dix: without stories
[14:01] herman Bergson: I am not such a video lover....
[14:02] Justine Rhapsody: I agree about some of the ads!
[14:02] Paula Dix: i have a history of art teacher that says theories are nice and we should learn them, but we cant forget that art is also about fruition
[14:02] Paula Dix: again, there is such word in english??
[14:02] herman Bergson: Sometimes when you see what is called art, you ar enot sure whether you look at something profound or just make it pull a leg...
[14:03] Paula Dix: yes :)))
[14:03] oola Neruda: then ask who did it
[14:03] oola Neruda: and find out about them
[14:03] Paula Dix: but that doesnt have to mean anything
[14:03] oola Neruda: right
[14:03] Paula Dix: i mean, something you disliked suddleny become good because of who made it?
[14:03] herman Bergson: and you thjink they'll give an honest answer oola...:-)
[14:03] Paula Dix: lol
[14:03] oola Neruda: oh i see what you are saying
[14:03] herman Bergson: I have seen too many art students and their work :-)
[14:04] oola Neruda: i was refering to all of history of art
[14:04] Paula Dix: a drawing teacher says we should never trow out what we do, even if hated
[14:04] oola Neruda: and no... a lot of wannabes... just blow a lot of hot air... and haven't a clue
[14:04] Paula Dix: because with time we can see good things there
[14:04] oola Neruda: i agree with your teacher paula
[14:04] oola Neruda: i cannot believe what i learned by getting out old drawings
[14:05] Paula Dix: i think its the same, someone can be a great artist without any training
[14:05] Paula Dix: lol for me all i do looks bad :))))
[14:05] Paula Dix: i have to wait some years :)
[14:06] herman Bergson: produce bad things consistently may be seen as an art too :-)
[14:06] Paula Dix: like that thing of putting a monkey to paint, or a child, then ask critics to evaluate
[14:06] oola Neruda: there are a few that made it without training...but i think the judgement came externally... and they were not all trying to be
[14:06] Paula Dix: and then laugh at them
[14:06] Paula Dix: that makes no sense, because the work can be good even if without intention
[14:06] oola Neruda: that shows a lack of understanding about art
[14:07] oola Neruda: good? there we need a long long discussion..what is good art
[14:07] herman Bergson: it is a supposition indeed that an work of art should have a meaning other than being itself
[14:07] Paula Dix: exact,,, the critic may have liked it no matter where it came from
[14:07] oola Neruda: eva hess's work was about the evolution of the picture plane in the history of art
[14:08] Paula Dix: and the meaning change from place to place, time to time, people to people, so it cant be absolute in judging it
[14:08] herman Bergson: yes...and then the new dimension oola brings up...the difference between good and bad art...really a fun one :-)
[14:08] oola Neruda: and if you looked at it another way... you will miss the most important part of it
[14:08] herman Bergson: enough for two extra days of debate..without sleep :-)
[14:09] Paula Dix: lol i like Goombrich saying that goes "there is no bad art, only people that cant understand this or that wokrs"
[14:09] oola Neruda: freida kahlo was about her emotions... and to look at her art without realizing might think she was not skilled
[14:09] oola Neruda: i agree with goombrich
[14:09] Paula Dix: ah, yes! there is art that need the meaning to make sense, like conceptual
[14:10] herman Bergson: It is always a terrific argument to claim that the beholder of your work just doesnt understand always and you are alwys right ^_^
[14:10] oola Neruda: or religious art
[14:10] Paula Dix: yes
[14:10] Justine Rhapsody: :)
[14:10] oola Neruda: which can be taken for illustration
[14:10] Justine Rhapsody: I look forward to getting the rest of this chat log and reading it, I missed so much
[14:11] oola Neruda: because of it's didacticism
[14:11] Paula Dix: yes, like tellling what kind of art is "higher" than others
[14:11] herman Bergson: dont make bad looking just dont understand your own artwork yet....:-)
[14:11] Paula Dix: lol yes!!!
[14:11] Paula Dix: i guess its that it doesnt came out as i intended, so i dislike
[14:11] Justine Rhapsody: who can
[14:11] Justine Rhapsody: lol, I am envious of anyone who can make art
[14:11] oola Neruda: for me, personally, art is a journey of searching... and also a catharsis
[14:12] Paula Dix: but thats not the work fault :))
[14:12] Paula Dix: ah, catharsis i guess a better work in english than my "fruition"
[14:13] herman Bergson: Well..there are examples of painters who claimed not to make art at all..and their work wasnt recognized as art either...untill later.....all of a sudden someone says it is art....and he became a great painter
[14:13] Paula Dix: lol justine me too!
[14:13] Paula Dix: true, and vice-versa
[14:13] oola Neruda: and yes... what is "high" art... and who is better... is a really really loaded question
[14:13] Paula Dix: ive read a book made by a woman from an university here, called Falence of Critics
[14:14] Paula Dix: she says critics, and any try on evaluating value on art is non-sense
[14:14] herman Bergson: well what is the sense of paying 22m million dollar for a painting of van Gogh???
[14:14] Paula Dix: lol i will one day try to translate that :)) make this my long term project
[14:14] oola Neruda: i agree... i feel a critic should be one who helps people understand what they are seeing
[14:15] Paula Dix: oh, and that japanese millionaire who wants to be buried with his van Gogh?
[14:15] oola Neruda: it is a money thing... purely about money...not art
[14:15] herman Bergson: Really?
[14:15] oola Neruda: an investment
[14:15] Paula Dix: i dont mind art having these prices. But its very very sad that the artist never get any
[14:15] oola Neruda: like you invest in diamonds or land
[14:15] herman Bergson: some do....
[14:16] oola Neruda: market is manipulated too
[14:16] herman Bergson: Picasso , men\
[14:16] Paula Dix: yes, but its rare... duchamp worked a lot rebuying and resolding his works :)
[14:16] Justine Rhapsody: sorry I must leave now, good bye all
[14:16] Paula Dix: bye!
[14:16] oola Neruda: baiee Justine
[14:17] oola Neruda: i should get going also
[14:17] herman Bergson: Well thank you all...I now go and see art in the SL6B sims if you dont mind :-)

No comments:

Post a Comment