[QUOTE]Originally posted by jerry thomas:
When you have 2-1/2 minutes to spare, press here, ..QUOTE]

Jerry, Dan Dunn's performance art reminds me of something my neighbor/art teacher told me once. I was saying watercolor attracts me because it allows you develop it one color at a time, in layers. He said what works for you depends on how you "see" things; he knew someone who developed very complex oil landscapes in top-to-bottom horizontal strips (just like an ink-jet printer)!

quote:

Originally posted by BobHale:
I know it's my fault but let's have you in neutral corners now please gentlemen. No one on the planet will ever convince Richard that something that doesn't rhyme is a poem and no one on the planet will ever convince people in the opposite camp (zm and me included) that something HAS to rhyme to be poetry. So lets all agree to disagree.

I would prefer to argue for the artistic integrity of innovative art.

A bloke painted a picture of a woman he wanted to know and carried that picture with him until he died.
That painting is now one of the most famous works of art on the planet and is constantly used to explain the difference between painting and art.
That painting has been reproduced in virtually exact detail countless times. Are those efforts art?

An artist made a statement with a rumpled bed and the conceit is still being discussed today. In my opinion it is art because of the context.
Would the unmade bed be art if it had a naked shiela laying in a gynacological position on it with swollen and reddened genitals?
Lucien Freude is famous for such paintings of exquisitely detailed rumpled beds with sketchy nudes who have apparently just played the two backed beast with Lucien Freude.
Why is that unquestionably great art but the physical representation of the perfectly unmade bed is to be scoffed at?
One thinker produced four minutes and thirty three seconds of apparent silence and some still laugh but it is art and has just been recognised as such by a court of law who upheld a copyright dispute in favour of the original artist who was sampled beyond the allowable time limit.
That recording is not four minutes and thirty three seconds of silence. there is plenty of noise. You hear the performer walk on stage and sit at the piano and turn pages and you hear the audience breath and squirm and be there and you hear four minutes and thirty three seconds of a performer not playing piano and you hear the performer then leave.
That is art and a copy of it is plaigarism.

I will submit personal poetic evidence in later posts.

.,,

quote:

Originally posted by BobHale:
OK guys. You just go at it bare-knuckle.Me, I've heard this discussion. I'm off to read some poetry.

This is not even gloved.
This isn't even tag or tip.
This is simply opinion and quite polite at that.
You mob must be not very familiar with Aussies or Spaniards.
Maybe I shouldn't invite anybody in case they are too vigorous.

.,,

quote:

Originally posted by neveu:
Has anyone here ever actually attended a performance of 4'32"?

I have listened to it and found myself thinking more deeply and on more wideranging topics than I had during any other artistic experience.
Each small noise became a tiny perfect puzzle to be examined.
Why was the page turned then and was it in rhythm with the previous pages turned.
Did someone just leave or was that a late arrival?
I must confess that I am often overwhelmed by some strident music performed with too much vigour.
The Ride Of The Valkyries being a prime example of more being too much but the performance of the non performance is totally in my head.
How much more artistic can that be?

.,,

quote:

Originally posted by Richard English:And I challenge anyone to explain to any normal person's satisfaction how John Cage's 4'32" can be music or Tracey Emins's dirty bed, art. They are not art - good or bad - by any definition that a reasonable person would accept.

John Cage's 4'32" is not music but it is art.
Tracy Emin's bed is not a painting but it is art.

Has my above post satisfied your challenge or should I elaborate?

.,,

.,, I'm sure I'm going to enjoy (and agree with) many of your posts an art, music and poetry. However, if you succeed in convincing Richard of the merits of Tracy Emin, John Cage or any poet in the world who doesn't rhyme you'll have done something I haven't been able to do in the six or seven years I've known him.

Good luck.

Good luck.

It will be fun to see somebody else—more stubborn than I—butt heads with Richard. Good luck doesn't quite live up to it. More like, beano sweat. But, I'll wish you "good luck", too, anyway.

quote:

Originally posted by BobHale:
.,, I'm sure I'm going to enjoy (and agree with) many of your posts an art, music and poetry. However, if you succeed in convincing Richard of the merits of Tracy Emin, John Cage or any poet in the world who doesn't rhyme you'll have done something I haven't been able to do in the six or seven years I've known him.

Good luck.

If it is simply unrhymed or scanned poetry I'll drop one of those just after I have a quick brekky.

.,,
I don't believe in luck. Logic rules O.K.!

This message has been edited. Last edited by: .,,,

Here's the opinion of someone who has spent five years of her life studying art at the University.
Art is always subjective. Rembrandt, Da Vinci, Michelangelo, Bernini, Goya, Imhoteph, Senenmut were paid for their work. And that's what their works of art are in fact. Work. It was their job.
That we now consider Hatshepshut's temple, La Maja Desnuda, Saqqara, David, the Sixtine Chapel, The Nightwatch art is because of our own perception only.
For them, it was just paid work.
So, my definition of art only works for me and no one else but me.
If it moves me, if it makes me think, if it makes me laugh, it it makes me cry, if it makes me watch at its sheer beauty, it's art,
If not, it's not.

Occam's Recovery
Naked
Naked bruises
Naked in bruises
Naked in my bruises
Naked in but my bruises
Naked in nothing but my bruises
Naked, dressed in nothing but my bruises!
Dressed in nothing but my bruises
Dressed nothing but my bruises
Dressed nothing but bruises
Dressed nothing bruises
Dressed bruises
Dressed

This thread had caused some, shall we say, "spirited" posts before, and I suspect Richard will sit this one out.

We all have different opinions on art, and therefore I don't think people ever really "convince" people to think their way. I love the French impressionists at the Chicago Art Institute, for example, but I have never relished those religious paintings of Jesus and the like; others love them, I am sure. You won't convince me, and I won't convince you. What of it?

The point is to respect each others' views.

quote:

Originally posted by Kalleh:
This thread had caused some, shall we say, "spirited" posts before, and I suspect Richard will sit this one out.

We all have different opinions on art, and therefore I don't think people ever really "convince" people to think their way. I love the French impressionists at the Chicago Art Institute, for example, but I have never relished those religious paintings of Jesus and the like; others love them, I am sure. You won't convince me, and I won't convince you. What of it?

The point is to respect each others' views.

Who is showing anybody any disrespect????

Are you saying that there is no point to discussions about art because opinions on art are polemic?

I have not yet closed my mind and it is quite possible that I have been conned by charlatans and this will be revealed to me so that I will stop wasting my time listening to almost but not quite silence that makes a dropped pin sound interesting at the time.

I am very uncomfortable with the concept of closed ideas and or discussions of art.

Has Richard been badly treated by an artist on these boards? If so it is only fair to tell me so that I will go easy on him. I would certainly not wish to inadvertantly damage anybody with a poem.

.,,

quote:

I have not yet closed my mind and it is quite possible that I have been conned by charlatans and this will be revealed to me so that I will stop wasting my time listening to almost but not quite silence that makes a dropped pin sound interesting at the time.

.,,

But what does it matter if the artist is a charlatan or not if you enjoy his work?
I once stood for hours looking at the wonderful symmetry of the time ravaged marble pillars of the Parthenon. White, tall, proud in spite of their scars and because of their scars.
Someone approached me and said:
But what do you see in these old stones?
He saw stones and I saw eternity.

I once stood for hours
Looking at the wonderful symmetry
Of the time ravaged marble pillars
Of the Parthenon. White, tall, proud
In spite of their scars
And because of their scars.
Someone approached me and said:
But what do you see in these old stones?
He saw stones and I saw eternity.

Poetry? Prose?
Art? Non-art?

quote:

?
Poetry? Prose?
Art? Non-art?

My experience, and no more.

Okay, this is fun. Nice words, Alexa-- may I?

I once stood for hours looking
At the symmetry of the ravaged
Parthenon, the scarred marble
Pillars------------------proud
Tall--------------------white

Someone approached me and said
What do you see
In old stones

I see eternity

sorry for weird lines-- only way I could insert spaces with this text program

It is absolutely prose. Just because it is laid out like "poetry", it doesn't mean it is poetry.

quote:

Originally posted by Seanahan:
It is absolutely prose. Just because it is laid out like "poetry", it doesn't mean it is poetry.

Just curious. Would it have been poetry if the original writer had laid it out like poetry with the intention of writing a poem?

quote:

Just curious. Would it have been poetry if the original writer had laid it out like poetry with the intention of writing a poem?

The original writer just wanted to convey what the Parthenon meant to her.
And she said so.
I found poetry in the white marble columns.

quote:

Originally posted by Alexa Cohen:

quote:

Just curious. Would it have been poetry if the original writer had laid it out like poetry with the intention of writing a poem?

The original writer just wanted to convey what the Parthenon meant to her.
And she said so.
I found poetry in the white marble columns.

I have found poetry when I discovered the Fibonacci pattern in a sunflower.

This had nothing to do with the sunflower which was busily minding it's own business being a sunflower.

Many many art critics scoff at a perfect urinal signed by an artist as a con but I am of the opinion that these critics can not see beyond reality.
What would be the result if a previously unknown Picasso rendition of a urinal were discovered?
I am referring to a painting of a urinal signed by Picasso.
How about a painting of a bowl of fruit by signed by Rembrandt?
The art world would go spare.
Just imagine if someone found a public urinal bearing the signature of Leonardo da Vinci.
There would be art and exposes and movies aplenty.

The point of art like Cage and Emin is to point out that art depicts something that is absent.
Art is a representation by a lack or a removal or an interpretation.
Art removes what is not necessary and fills that void with a profound message.

A painting of a urinal is not a urinal. A painting of a urinal is a surface with a bunch of pigments and glues and sealers that is interpreted as a representation of a urinal but it can never be a urinal. A painting of a urinal can not ever be a urinal.
A painting of a bed can never be a bed.

What is more completely artistic and interpretative than a bed or a urinal taken totally out of the everyday world and placed into the context of art.
No sane person will lie down in the bed or urinate in the urinal because all know it to be art.

I can not remember who or what { I will bet that Alexa will know} artist did this but I remember a furour over an artist who painted a perfect representation of something banal like a pistol and then wrote on the painting words similar to, 'This is not a pistol'.
That is now recognised as great ironic art {and displays my ignorance that I don't know the artist} and I wonder if anybody here would like to claim that to be not art.
Assuming the negative I must wonder why a signed urinal or bed is not art while a signed perfect representation of a pistol saying it is not a pistol is great art.

Art is utterly in the eye of the beholder and reveals more of the viewer than the artist could possibly imagine.

.,,

Nicely put, .,, You have captured something many often miss-- that art involves carving out, deleting; there is as much absent as there is present. If 'artfully' done, the spaces allow the viewer to place details of his own experience into the frame suggested by the artist.

Turning Alexa's prose into poetry (IMO obviously) involves
(a)the deletion of a bit of connective tissue (articles, conjunctions), which becomes redundant to the lineal structure
(b)the deletion of any words which might tell the reader 'what to feel' (i.e., 'wonderful')
(c)the deletion or replacement of any actual reduncancies where possible (e.g. 'time-ravaged' becomes 'ravaged'-- less common, & 'time-' is implied; 'He saw stones' understood in context)
(d)the tweaking of word order and line content so as to bring in the 5 senses where possible (e.g., Parthenon, marble, scarred brought into position so as to create a repetitive view/sound in hopes of imitating the placement of the pillars; in addition the preponderance of 'arr' and 'rr' sounds here and in other of the words selected help create the sense of damaged by time-- like 'rip', like 'rough', it is the sound of weathering)

The reason this works in the case of Alexa's prose is because there was a kernel of a metaphor to be unearthed-- a visual icon which contains a sort-of beat/beat/beat of time suggesting eternity in a work which another may see simply as 'old stones'.

This message has been edited. Last edited by: bethree5,

quote:

Who is showing anybody any disrespect????

No one, .,,; no need to look for trouble when none is there. I just meant that we can't start out thinking one kind of art is the only way to go, while another kind isn't art at all. That, to me, is disrespect for others' views.

quote:

I am very uncomfortable with the concept of closed ideas and or discussions of art.

Me, too. I wasn't in any way saying that the concept shouldn't be discussed.

On the other hand, forum discussions can be different that in-person discussions. Just as you misinterpreted my 2 points above, misinterpretations happen online; people get ruffled feathers; the discussions can go awry. This discussion was on the borderline for that, and therefore I had suggested that we remember to respect each others' views.

If you wish to question me privately about anything I've said, feel free to. I just would like cogent, friendly discussion, and not having to walk on eggs with every post. That's how Wordcraft has been in its first 5 years, and that's how we'd like it to continue.

Thank you.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Map-territory_relation

I was wrong.
It is a pipe.

quote:

Originally posted by Kalleh:

quote:

Who is showing anybody any disrespect????

No one, .,,; no need to look for trouble when none is there. I just meant that we can't start out thinking one kind of art is the only way to go, while another kind isn't art at all. That, to me, is disrespect for others' views.

quote:

I am very uncomfortable with the concept of closed ideas and or discussions of art.

Me, too. I wasn't in any way saying that the concept shouldn't be discussed.

Your interference didn't do anything to foster debate on the subject.

Which art have I dismissed as not being art?
I can find art in a sunflower.

A number of very highly respected and innovative artists have been dismissed as being fraudulent and utterly lacking of artistic content.
Where have been your interferences in that other than to give the major profferer of such opinion a convenient lifeline for him to withdraw and not justify or substantiate any of his assertations or respond to any of the responses to the challenges that he posed that he considered to be impossible.
I gave context and meaning and imagery that a blind Newcastle miner would understand but have recived stern silence as a response to the logical defence of an extraordinary attack on fundamental artistic principles in general and seminal artists of amazing vision and scope.

No one is banging on about the 'silence' of Cage now that they know taht it is not silence.

Who is mocking the signed urnial or the unmade bed now?
No one but an absence does not replace a positive. Two wrongs are not right.

I attacked and disrespected no one and will not as I have no need.
I am not ineterested in the messenger and don't care if they reside in a fictional universe of very ugly repute and have a name that gives my brain a cramp.
I am interested in the words and concepts of such a being.
I am not threatened by them and do not fear them and may not agree with many of them but I am learning from them.

quote:

Originally posted by Kalleh:On the other hand, forum discussions can be different that in-person discussions. Just as you misinterpreted my 2 points above, misinterpretations happen online; people get ruffled feathers; the discussions can go awry. This discussion was on the borderline for that, and therefore I had suggested that we remember to respect each others' views.

Respect is an utterly two way street and is earned not imposed.
Please show me any respect that I have received from the moment I arrived.
I have been suspected of being a troll and of being a bloody twin poster.
Good lord. You know that Alexa posts from South America and that I post from Australia.
I don't even use a temporary e-mail address to hide me.
My e-mail address here is my private e-mail address and will remain so for as long as I live.
For me to be treated as a twin poster is utterly absurd and beyond silly.
My language is consistent.
My accent the same.
My attitude utterly identical.
Alexa is way way more florid than me and the Spanish word construction is utterly alien to mine and she is obviously and extremely voluptuously female whereas I could not possibly be mistaken for anything other than a crusty old bloke with a very hard nose and fixed notions.

quote:

Originally posted by Kalleh:If you wish to question me privately about anything I've said, feel free to. I just would like cogent, friendly discussion, and not having to walk on eggs with every post. That's how Wordcraft has been in its first 5 years, and that's how we'd like it to continue.

Thank you.

I tried that with you but you insisted in tweaking my nose in public and ruining a perfectly workable relationship.

You have burnt some important bridges and hurt me very deeply in the porocess.
I have done nothing to anybody.
I told no one to go away.
I told no one to change their style.
I showed disrespect to no one.
I accused no one of ranting.
I threatened to ignore no one.
I broke no rules.
I supplied logical and cogent substance for my opinions and in doing so did not insinuate anything.
I proffered my art and was accused of plagiarism.
I proffered more of my art and was invited to go back to forums taht I have been banned from.
I am constantly accused of being aggressive and disrespectful but utterly no examples of my aggression or disrespect are forthcming.
Then my attitude is questioned but again with no substance provided.
Then I am accused of being a troll.
Then I am accused of being a twin.
Then I am told by a very regular poster that the very regular poster is being snide to me because that very regular poster wants me to leave the forum.
That very regular poster took something like 20 or less posts to come to the staggeringly and demonstrably wrong conclusion that I was a troll and or a twin yet has the cojones to tell me that I should have lurked longer to get a feel for the place. {he was actually right there}.

Again this very regular poster is now faced with the slowly dawning reality that I am nothing like a troll jusxt as the realisation slowly dawns that I am not the twin of Alexa my little Spanish showshow.

In that situation I would be backpeddling and doing a bit more lurking and a bit less kicking until the newbie can settle down.
How am I hurting anybody?
Why am I so threatening that I am being hazed out of the joint?
What have I done that is so bad?
I would love to do a precis of my first fifty psots to itemise the 'attitude' and 'aggression' and 'disrespect' but I couldn't be bothered because I already know the answer.
Other than saying that I considered that some Australian idiom books are tosh and that Bill Bryson is an adequate travel writer and an failed comic I showed disrespect and aggression and attitude to no one.
If Bill Bryson is posting here I am sorry but I paid my $15 and I was not impressed. Sorry mate but that's the way it is. I still reckon that you are better than most but that is a left handed compliment at best.

Robert Maurice Bennie

Robert Maurice Bennie said, "I am not threatened by them and do not fear them and may not agree with many of them but I am learning from them.


Special request, Robert: Please describe (succinctly, please) ONE thing that you have learned here, and (b) give us a short demonstration of how you apply that learning to your behavior here.

Thanks !!

quote:

Respect is an utterly two way street and is earned not imposed.
Please show me any respect that I have received from the moment I arrived.
I have been suspected of being a troll and of being a bloody twin poster.


Robert Maurice Bennie

Yep. Why would I show respect to someone who does nor show respect to me?
But what the hell, after all I got a laugh thinking someone could take me for a male Aussie no less...

¡Viva España y la azafata española!

I have made my views clear and have stated my belief already that unmade beds, calves heads in formaldehyde and periods of silence are not any kind of art by any standards that I accept.

Even if their creators genuinely believed that they were great works of art (which I doubt - I suspect they believed that they were actually great sources of income) they are not art by my standards. If others choose to believe they are art, that's their business - but just don't try to convert me unless you can supply me with evidence, not simply beliefs.

I have read every one of the many different postings on this subject and have not changed my mind.

And I will say no more as I do not wish to be attacked for insulting people and trying to cause trouble (which is an accusation that has been levelled at me both publicly and privately). I enjoy debate immensely and would like to contribute further to this topic (I have recently read an article in The Times that gives interesting background to the Damien Hirst artistic creations). But I know full well that, if I do, I will most likely be attacked for expressing my views.

I will therefore write nothing more about this topic.

We all have different views on art, and to debate them is great. Yet at times this thread has gone a little awry with people making judgments about others' art preferences. That's human nature of course, and I blame no one. Normally I'd just say c'est la vie. However, because of recent stressful times here, I'd like to ask one of the administrators to please close this thread. I'd do it, but I'll be leaving for Vienna in about 10 minutes and just don't have the time.

Done.