Bill Aycock on sun 13 apr 97
At 01:43 PM 4/12/97 EDT, you wrote:
>----------------------------Original message----------------------------
>
>yep...it makes a lot of value judgements, and sets such an extreme value
>on theft of student work, from someone who is an authority, that a
>measured, thoughtful response becomes unlikely.
> Martin Schiller
>
Martin, I'm not sure I get your point. Jack made some value judgements, but,
so do I. I think we all should, or we are sheep.
Theft is to be abhored, in any case, but there is a range of values in what
the effect on the world is, from the loss of the thing stolen. IMHO, the
loss of photos of Soldner, etal, streaking is not a real loss, but a
blessing (to everyone but Soldner). The loss of great work is saddening, and
IT MATTERS NOT IF IT WAS STUDENT WORK, if it was good.
I wish I had seen the work, from what Jack says. If the existing pictures
are available on the net, or in an available publication, someone please let
me know.
I dont miss seeing the photos, and it would take a lot to convince me of
ANY value in the photos, or in the act. Streaking is not an act of freedom,
it is an act of ego seeking notice.
Bill- being judgemental (again)- on Persimmon Hill, where the judgement of
the Cardinals that I am late with the goodies,(again) is of great importance.
Sorry, Birdies
Bill Aycock --- Persimmon Hill --- Woodville, Alabama, USA
--- (in the N.E. corner of the State)
also-- W4BSG -- Grid EM64vr baycock@hiwaay.net
Martin Schiller on mon 14 apr 97
>Martin, I'm not sure I get your point. Jack made some value judgements, but,
>so do I. I think we all should, or we are sheep.
>
>Theft is to be abhored, in any case, but there is a range of values in what
>the effect on the world is, from the loss of the thing stolen. IMHO, the
>loss of photos of Soldner, etal, streaking is not a real loss, but a
>blessing (to everyone but Soldner). The loss of great work is saddening, and
>IT MATTERS NOT IF IT WAS STUDENT WORK, if it was good.
Do you mean that all of us are allowed to make our own value judgements,
as long as we agree with you and Jack that theft is to be abhored and
"the theft of actual work,
especially of the caliber of Keisuke's is truly disgusting"?
Your emphasis of IT MATTERS NOT IF IT WAS STUDENT WORK attempts to
establish a value judgement that I didn't make, and I take exception.
Sometimes I don't make my points well and am misunderstood, but I did
*not* try to make the point that it was all right to steal student work.
Some of the points that crossed my mind, though, were....
Point. From a photographers point of view, pictures stolen are, perhaps,
as much "real work" as the work of anyone else - whatever strong feelings
you (and Jack) may have regarding the subject of the photographs.
Point. Perhaps - the work might have later been claimed as the
prerogative of a graduate thesis advisor under the badge of authority
granted by a university. There is some precedent for this practise. Not
only "real work", but research papers that have later been published for
profit.
Point. The work is now beyond the control of the author, and is embarked
on it's great adventure. The fact of it's theft has - again, perhaps -
changed Keisuke's life and career path, by focusing the attention of a
broader audience on his loss and the quality of his work. So both the
author and the offspring move on. A tale in the making - and then there's
the thief. What of the tale of his compulsion? A crime of passion? Greed?
Did Keisuke's work cry out to him to be liberated? Did some notorious
gambling overlord contract for it's theft upon finding that it was not
for sale?
regards,
Martin Schiller
Karl David Knudson on mon 14 apr 97
On Sun, 13 Apr 1997, Bill Aycock wrote:
> ANY value in the photos, or in the act. Streaking is not an act of freedom,
> it is an act of ego seeking notice.
> Bill- being judgemental (again)- on Persimmon Hill, where the judgement of
Isn't there some benefit though of having those giant egos doing things to
get noticed. I suppose it would all depend on where you idealize ceramic
art as going. If you see the glorious future being hermit and basement
potters living in quiet bliss in total obscurity to the art world in
general, you woudl probably be against any sort of ego display. Of course
if you viewed the future as being a place where us mud hounds are viewed
with the same importance shown to painters and sculptors, some big egos
are going to be needed to get us that attention...
In other words: Leggo my ego.
Karl in Eugene
Evan Dresel on tue 15 apr 97
Actually what I find ironic about this sad event is that the Las Vegas
casinos have probably the most amazing security in the commercial world.
Maybe they could be embarased into making restitution. I suppose the greed
vibes from the gaming tables got to someone. Well at least art is still
valued enough to risk imprisonment.
-- Evan who, if he ever becomes an art-thief will settle for nothing less
than frescos. Now there's a challenge!
Mark Issenberg on wed 16 apr 97
Howdy All:
I guess I like to put in my two cents.
1. The show was not at a casino. If at it had been at a casino, it would
have been taped and the thieves would have been identified and probably
in jail.
2. If you were at NCECA in LV and noticed that in the casinos there were
all these black bubbles hanging from all the ceilings throughout. They
were watching us making sure we were not messing with their machines.
My two cents.
Mark in Miami
Bill Aycock on wed 16 apr 97
At 09:53 AM 4/14/97 EDT, you wrote:
>
>Isn't there some benefit though of having those giant egos doing things to
>get noticed. I suppose it would all depend on where you idealize ceramic
>art as going. some big egos
>are going to be needed to get us that attention...
I agree about the big Egos, and I think this list has a LOT of them, but,
and I really feel this--- those egos can help most by getting attention to
the work, not by flash (pun intended). Burning down a temple brings
illumination, but of the wrong kind, and only temporarily. It does not bring
the illumination of understanding. But-- it sure does get notice.
>In other words: Leggo my ego.
>Karl in Eugene
>
Karl- I'm ashamed of you, I'll swear you wrote just to get to the place
where you could say that. (read- "why didnt I think of that?"
Bill Aycock --- Persimmon Hill --- Woodville, Alabama, USA
--- (in the N.E. corner of the State)
also-- W4BSG -- Grid EM64vr baycock@hiwaay.net
Karl David Knudson on thu 17 apr 97
On Wed, 16 Apr 1997, Bill Aycock wrote:
> ----------------------------Original message----------------------------
> I agree about the big Egos, and I think this list has a LOT of them, but,
> and I really feel this--- those egos can help most by getting attention to
> the work, not by flash (pun intended).
Ah, but are our egos cyber-egos? How well do we translate into the real
world? The ceramics movement in general has a few good ones who really
come to my mind: Soldner (for being Himself), Reitz and Volkous,
W. MacKenzie (For making NICE pots and pricing them so that even a
student in the 90's returning from his first NCECA can afford to buy a
few >thanks<). Add your own to the list. George Orr would have been a
good one. What would he be like today? What I don't really see
though are potters with enough public ego and skill to really become a
household name. Both in the past and the present. I would like to see
that change, because >I THINK< that it would bring respect to our art in
general. Wouldn't it be nice to have a potter mentioned in a list of
great artists?
> Burning down a temple brings
> illumination, but of the wrong kind, and only temporarily. It does not bring
> the illumination of understanding. But-- it sure does get notice.
I'm not going to equate burning temples with being naked. ;P (That's a
smiley) But it does being up a number of non-clay points that I don't
have answers for concerning our society, like why is graphic violence ok,
but nudity/sex BAD!!! Why can men go topless but when a woman does it's
indecent exposure? Is there something inhernetly pornographic about the
female body? Why is there such a problem with breast feeding babies?
?????
>> In other words: Leggo my ego.
> Karl- I'm ashamed of you, I'll swear you wrote just to get to the place
> where you could say that. (read- "why didnt I think of that?"
I was pretty proud of it myself.
Karl in Eugene
| |
|
