Bill Merrill on mon 23 aug 10
PART 1
THE LAYMAN CONTINUES TO ASSUME THAT WORKS OF ART SHOULD BE
RECOGNIZABLE, EASY TO IDENTIFY, AND PLEASE ALL PEOPLE. BUT THERE IS NO
OBLIGATION ON THE ARTIST'S PART TO DO THIS. YOU SEE, IT IS WITHIN THE
ARTIST'S REALM TO DO WHAT HE OR SHE CHOOSES WHEN CREATING ART. WHETHER
IT IS GOOD OR BAD IS OF LITTLE CONSEQUENCE.
=3D20
"HOW DO YOU KNOW WHAT IS GOOD OR BAD ART" ARE FREQUENTLY HEARD QUESTIONS
AT MANY EXHIBITIONS OF ART. THERE IS A NATURAL DESIRE BY THE LAYMAN AND
SOCIETY IN GENERAL TO ESTABLISH A BASIS FOR CHOICE IN THE AREA OF
PAINTING, DRAWING, SCULPTURE, CERAMICs ETC. SHOULD ARM-CHAIR ARTISTS
HAVE AS THEIR GOAL A DESIRE FOR ESTHETIC JUDGMENTS, TO TELL A "BAD"
SCULPTURE FROM A "GOOD" ONE, TO RECOGNIZE A POOR DESIGN OR A MEDIOCRE
PAINTING? WHAT DO THE WORDS "GOOD", "BAD", "POOR", AND "MEDIOCRE" MEAN
WHEN APPLIED TO THE PLASTIC AND VISUAL ARTS?=3D20
=3D20
IF WE ARE PRESUMPTUOUS ENOUGH TO ASSUME THAT THERE ARE UNIVERSAL,
PRECISE CRITERIA WHICH MAY BE APPLIED TO THE VISUAL ARTS, THEN THE
APPLICATION OF THE VALUE TERM SUCH AS "BAD" AND "GOOD" SUGGESTS THAT THE
CRITIC WHO MAKES SUCH AN EVALUATION IS FAMILIAR WITH THE TERMS AND JUST
POSSIBLY MAY BE CAPABLE OF ANALYZING THE WORK OF ART IN QUESTION AND CAN
APPLY THE TERM WITH OBJECTIVITY.=3D20
=3D20
THE QUESTION OF ABSOLUTE VALUES IN THE AREAS OF ESTHETICS HAS
CONCERNED CRITICS AND PHILOSOPHERS FOR CENTURIES. MANY CRITICS AND
ESTHETICIANS HAVE ATTEMPTED TO ORGANIZE AND CONSTRUCT VALUE SYSTEMS FOR
THE FINE ARTS. NONE OF THEM HAVE COME CLOSE TO SOLVING THE PROBLEM, AND
ALL OF THEIR SYSTEMS HAVE PROVEN INADEQUATE. INEVITABLY, THE JURORS ARE
CONFRONTED WITH THE APPLICATION OF THE SO-CALLED RULES THEY HAVE
CONSTRUCTED, AND IT IS AT THIS POINT THAT MAJOR PROBLEMS ARISE. FIRST,
IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR THE JUROR TO ELIMINATE THE PERSONAL RESPONSES OF
THE VIEWER FROM HIS FUNCTION AS JUDGE. ALSO DIFFICULT IS THE APPLICATION
OF RULES THAT WE ADEQUATE IN THE PAST TO NEW AVANT-GARDE WORKS OF ART,
WHICH DENY AND EVEN DEFY TRADITION. THE CLASSIC EXAMPLE OF THIS WAS WHEN
TRADITIONAL VALUES WERE APPLIED TO NEW FORMS OF ART. IN THE CASE I SPEAK
OF, I REFER TO THE GENERAL CRITICAL RESPONSE GIVEN TO THE WORKS OF
IMPRESSIONIST PAINTERS IN THE LATE NINETEENTH CENTURY. THESE PAINTERS
WERE REJECTED BY THE MAJORITY OF THE PUBLIC, THE CRITICS, AND MUSEUMS
BECAUSE THEY INTRODUCED METHODS OF PAINT APPLICATION AND COLOR USAGE
WHICH WAS NOT CONSTANT WITH EARLIER MASTERS. PAINTINGS BY PISSARRO-MONET
AND MANY OTHERS, WHICH ARE NOW UNQUESTIONABLY FINE WORKS OF ART, WERE
REJECTED AND DAMNED AS THE WORKS OF MADMEN.=3D20
Continued....
Hank Murrow on mon 23 aug 10
I suggest Rainer Maria Rilke's word on the subject of judgement.......
"Works of art are of an infinite loneliness and with nothing to =3D
be so little reached as with criticism.
Only love can grasp and hold and fairly =3D
judge them."
Cheers! Hank Murrow
On Aug 23, 2010, at 2:54 PM, Bill Merrill wrote:
> PART 1
>=3D20
> THE LAYMAN CONTINUES TO ASSUME THAT WORKS OF ART SHOULD BE
> RECOGNIZABLE, EASY TO IDENTIFY, AND PLEASE ALL PEOPLE. BUT THERE IS NO
> OBLIGATION ON THE ARTIST'S PART TO DO THIS. YOU SEE, IT IS WITHIN THE
> ARTIST'S REALM TO DO WHAT HE OR SHE CHOOSES WHEN CREATING ART. WHETHER
> IT IS GOOD OR BAD IS OF LITTLE CONSEQUENCE.
Eric Hansen on tue 24 aug 10
why is this in all caps? here on the internet that is tantamount to
YELLING AT PEOPLE don't you know?
h a n s e n
On Mon, Aug 23, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Bill Merrill wrote:
> PART 1
>
> =3DA0 =3DA0 =3DA0 =3DA0 =3DA0 =3DA0THE LAYMAN CONTINUES TO ASSUME THAT WO=
RKS OF ART S=3D
HOULD BE
> RECOGNIZABLE, EASY TO IDENTIFY, AND PLEASE ALL PEOPLE. BUT THERE IS NO
> OBLIGATION ON THE ARTIST'S PART TO DO THIS. YOU SEE, IT IS WITHIN THE
> ARTIST'S REALM TO DO WHAT HE OR SHE CHOOSES WHEN CREATING ART. WHETHER
> IT IS GOOD OR BAD IS OF LITTLE CONSEQUENCE.
>
>
>
> "HOW DO YOU KNOW WHAT IS GOOD OR BAD ART" ARE FREQUENTLY HEARD QUESTIONS
> AT MANY EXHIBITIONS OF ART. THERE IS A NATURAL DESIRE BY THE LAYMAN AND
> SOCIETY IN GENERAL TO ESTABLISH A BASIS FOR CHOICE IN THE AREA OF
> PAINTING, DRAWING, SCULPTURE, CERAMICs =3DA0ETC. SHOULD ARM-CHAIR ARTISTS
> HAVE AS THEIR GOAL A DESIRE FOR ESTHETIC JUDGMENTS, TO TELL A "BAD"
> SCULPTURE FROM A "GOOD" ONE, TO RECOGNIZE A POOR DESIGN OR A MEDIOCRE
> PAINTING? WHAT DO THE WORDS "GOOD", "BAD", "POOR", AND "MEDIOCRE" MEAN
> WHEN APPLIED TO THE PLASTIC AND VISUAL ARTS?
>
>
>
> =3DA0 =3DA0 IF WE ARE PRESUMPTUOUS ENOUGH TO ASSUME THAT THERE ARE UNIVER=
SAL,
> PRECISE CRITERIA WHICH MAY BE APPLIED TO THE VISUAL ARTS, THEN THE
> APPLICATION OF THE VALUE TERM SUCH AS "BAD" AND "GOOD" SUGGESTS THAT THE
> CRITIC WHO MAKES SUCH AN EVALUATION IS FAMILIAR WITH THE TERMS AND JUST
> POSSIBLY MAY BE CAPABLE OF ANALYZING THE WORK OF ART IN QUESTION AND CAN
> APPLY THE TERM WITH OBJECTIVITY.
>
>
>
> =3DA0 =3DA0 THE QUESTION OF ABSOLUTE VALUES IN THE AREAS OF ESTHETICS HAS
> CONCERNED CRITICS AND PHILOSOPHERS FOR CENTURIES. MANY CRITICS AND
> ESTHETICIANS HAVE ATTEMPTED TO ORGANIZE AND CONSTRUCT VALUE SYSTEMS FOR
> THE FINE ARTS. NONE OF THEM HAVE COME CLOSE TO SOLVING THE PROBLEM, AND
> ALL OF THEIR SYSTEMS HAVE PROVEN INADEQUATE. INEVITABLY, THE JURORS ARE
> CONFRONTED WITH THE APPLICATION OF THE SO-CALLED RULES THEY HAVE
> CONSTRUCTED, AND IT IS AT THIS POINT THAT MAJOR PROBLEMS ARISE. FIRST,
> IT IS IMPOSSIBLE FOR THE JUROR TO ELIMINATE THE PERSONAL RESPONSES OF
> THE VIEWER FROM HIS FUNCTION AS JUDGE. ALSO DIFFICULT IS THE APPLICATION
> OF RULES THAT WE ADEQUATE IN THE PAST TO NEW AVANT-GARDE WORKS OF ART,
> WHICH DENY AND EVEN DEFY TRADITION. THE CLASSIC EXAMPLE OF THIS WAS WHEN
> TRADITIONAL VALUES WERE APPLIED TO NEW FORMS OF ART. IN THE CASE I SPEAK
> OF, I REFER TO THE GENERAL CRITICAL RESPONSE GIVEN TO THE WORKS OF
> IMPRESSIONIST PAINTERS IN THE LATE NINETEENTH CENTURY. THESE PAINTERS
> WERE REJECTED BY THE MAJORITY OF THE PUBLIC, THE CRITICS, AND MUSEUMS
> BECAUSE THEY INTRODUCED METHODS OF PAINT APPLICATION AND COLOR USAGE
> WHICH WAS NOT CONSTANT WITH EARLIER MASTERS. PAINTINGS BY PISSARRO-MONET
> AND MANY OTHERS, WHICH ARE NOW UNQUESTIONABLY FINE WORKS OF ART, WERE
> REJECTED AND DAMNED AS THE WORKS OF MADMEN.
>
> Continued....
>
--=3D20
Eric Alan Hansen
Stonehouse Studio Pottery
Alexandria, Virginia
americanpotter.blogspot.com
thesuddenschool.blogspot.com
hansencookbook.blogspot.com
"To me, human life in all its forms, individual and aggregate, is a
perpetual wonder: the flora of the earth and sea is full of beauty and
of mystery which seeks science to understand; the fauna of land and
ocean is not less wonderful; the world which holds them both, and the
great universe that folds it in on everyside, are still more
wonderful, complex, and attractive to the contemplating mind." -
Theodore Parker, minister, transcendentalist, abolitionist (1810-1860)
| |
|
