[TheForge] Art, doncha know....

[Peter Fels And Phoebe Palmer]

a little behind, but ...Hear! Hear!
I bow to your eloquence Reis...pf

ries wrote:
> George- one mans moon beam is another mans masterpiece.
> 
> What we are talking about here is subjective personal opinion.
> 
> Take any historical era.
> How many truly incredible geniuses were painting in the time of 
> Michealangelo?
> ten?
> 
> And how many today?
> 
> Which is the exception, and which is the rule?
> 
> 
> Its true, that in the age of the De Medici's, the taste of a half dozen 
> really wealthy people set the standard for the entire "civilised world" 
> (which, of course, excluded everything but a small swatch of western 
> europe).
> And today, there are thousands of competing styles, esthetics, fashions, 
> and types of art and craft.
> So there are choices today, where in the renaissance, there were none- 
> you either looked at the paintings that the wealthy and the pope liked, 
> or you looked at nothing.
> 
> You are certainly welcome to think that Jackson Pollock, or Andy Warhol, 
> are "lame painters".
> I do not.
> I am not stupid, or uneducated, or cowed by some mythical cabal of critics.
> Instead, I have travelled the world, looking at paintings that go back 
> up to 20,000 years. I have studied art since I was a child. I have read 
> a great deal, and, I think most important, I have actually looked at, in 
> person, thousands of artworks, modern and ancient.
> And developed OPINONS based on what I have seen and read.
> 
> I would say I am just as entitled to those opinions as you are to love 
> whatever painters you love.
> And just as right, or wrong, as you are.
> 
> You like what you like. Thats great. I like different things- thats what 
> makes us unique humans, instead of clones.
> 
> And you did not address my point about modern blacksmiths, an area we 
> all know more about than abstract painting, being just as good as old ones.
> 
> Are Micheal Bondi, Scott Lankton, Al Paley, James Wallace, Russell 
> Jacque, Dan Miller, Maurice Hamburger, Peter Ross, Peter Renzetti, and a 
> hundred more I could name, all "exceptions"?
> 
> I have just gotten back from Buenos Aires, a city filled with late 19th 
> century ironwork- literally thousands of buildings with hand forged 
> balustrades, gates, and window grilles. All done at a time when 
> immaculate handwork was common, time was cheap, and quality was 
> paramount. And the vast majority of it is not as inspired as much of the 
> modern work we see in america today. It is competent, well done, copies 
> of french provincial or art noveau- but there are only a few masterpieces.
> A city like that, which, for a variety of political and economic 
> reasons, has not been ruined by the 20th century and walmart, lets us 
> see that great artists have always been few. And that the good old days 
> were not really so much better- different, certainly, and I am not 
> discounting 20th century capitalism's downgrading of the quality of 
> absolutely everything in exchange for profit. Me, I dont wanna be a 
> consumer. I buy few things, and select them carefully.
> 
> As for "the work stands alone"-
> 
> Well, it does, IF you know what you are looking at.
> 
> The average contemporary american could look at two pieces of metalwork, 
> side by side- say, a home depot piece of "ornamental iron", made of 
> stick welded 1/2" square tube, with a snap in plastic lambs tongue, and 
> a section of Yellin Railing for a mansion, and, frankly, not be able to 
> tell the difference.
> I have seen supposedly educated, wealthy people, with "taste", choose 
> absolutely horrific stuff again and again.
> No critics told em to do it.
> 
> Similarly, if you have never taken the time to study it, you might 
> confuse a $15 offset printed poster from a frame shop with an Agnes 
> Martin painting- she is a 90 something year old woman artist, who has 
> been living alone in the desert near Santa Fe for 50 years or so, 
> painting exquisite minimalist geometric line drawings, that, at first 
> look, especially online, inevitably bring up the "emporers new clothes" 
> comments. But when you look, really look, and read about what she does, 
> and why, a whole new world opens up.
> 
> Contemporary art may not be to your taste. And thats fine. But speaking 
> as someone who has been around modern art and artists all his life, I 
> can say that its real, and that it is often, (but certainly not always) 
> made by people who are educated, talented, and seriously thinking about 
> what they do, and why.
> 
> Then there is the whole questions of ideas versus technique.
> 
> Me, I am a pants and suspenders man- I want both.
> I know some true master craftsmen, who, frankly, couldnt design their 
> way out of a wet paper bag. And I know some incredible thinkers whose 
> work looks like crap because they are too undisicplined to actually 
> learn how to make stuff.
> And in between, we have people who understand both.
> 
> Many, many modern artists, whose work you would probably dislike, FIRST 
> become extremely skilled at their craft, and then proceed to make stuff 
> that is not to the taste of many traditionalists.
> Has nothing to do with tiddly winks- has to do with interesting brains 
> following an idea and seeing where it goes.
> For instance, I, personally, love the early cut metal work of Bill 
> Woodrow- now, this guy is quite competent in most sculpture techniques, 
> and when he does cast bronze stuff, its immaculately modeled and finished.
> But for a period of years, he chose to pick up junk from the street, and 
> using nothing but a pair of tinsnips, pull, in one case literally, 
> rabbits out of hats. The stuff is made of garbage, literally, with none 
> of your 19th century craftsmanship, and yet, every time I see one in 
> person, I am entranced. He is so DAMN SMART. I only wish some of my own 
> work could be so deft, so clever, so mysterious.
> A piece like this, in which a roman helmet somehow jumps out of a car 
> door and a parafin heater-
> http://www.billwoodrow.com/dev/sculpture_by_year.php?i=2&sel_year=1982&page=2&num=36 
> 
> well, I have seen this stuff in person, and it does, as you say, stand 
> on its own.
> 
> Ries
> 
> On Nov 7, 2007, at 5:38 AM, George Dixon wrote:
> 
> The occasional exception does little to disprove a reality.
> Being a competent draftsman, but a lame painter does not in any manner 
> bolster one's painting resume.
> 
> Kinda like "he might have lost the race, but you should see his skill at 
> tiddely-winks"..........
> 
> Everyone 'knows' someone who does not fit the overall 
> picture..........but the picture remains the same.
> Many have an investment in the shallow status-quo...not unlike the 
> tailor weaving moon beams for some naked emperor.
> 
> The work stands alone.
> 
> George Dixon
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Manage membership or unsubscribe at:
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/theforge
> theforge mail list group photo site is
> http://www.photoaccess.com
> Login:  blacksmithblacksmith at hotmail.com
> password:  anvil
> ___________
> 
> 
> 
> Ries Niemi
> Industrial Artist
> http://www.riesniemi.com/
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Manage membership or unsubscribe at:
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/theforge
> theforge mail list group photo site is
> http://www.photoaccess.com
> Login:  blacksmithblacksmith at hotmail.com
> password:  anvil
> ___________
> 
> 
>