Saturday, August 25, 2012

Pooped to pop

Either too busy or too tired or both. Up to the city three times this week, coffee IV in my left arm. One essay written and posted, another one remains in note form waiting for the fog to clear.

Maybe it's all of the smoke, either from forest fires or grass field burnings (photos in the can from this morning). Whatever it is, would someone (me) stop beating this horse? It's already... No not quite yet; not by a long shot.

But man, I'm tired.

4 comments:

  1. OK, took a look. Question...

    Does clever qualify as art?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Ken, I'm wondering what you're referring to with your question. Yet, it may not matter, for I can give you a general answer that may cover it all.

    At first blush, I would say that cleverness itself is not so much an art form as it is an element of the creative process. The "statement" the art makes might be clever, so it informs the reading as well.

    These days it becomes a bit more complicated. And when I write "these days," I mean the last 100 years of art, starting with Duchamp, when the idea behind the art often becomes paramount. Sometimes the art is merely the idea with no physical evidence to show for it. Broadly speaking, all of this falls under the rubric of "conceptual art."

    Not your cup of tea, I understand: http://www.moma.org/collection/browse_results.php?criteria=O%3AAD%3AE%3A4416&page_number=1&template_id=1&sort_order=1

    I suppose my point is that what constitutes "Art" is so open-ended, it takes an extra portion of generosity for someone like me who writes about art to give it its due.

    Now, if you were referring to the first artist mentioned in the essay, you might find it interesting that I made very similar work twenty years ago while I was in school. I don't mention that in the essay directly, but the paragraph about artists who teach in Chicago will be indirectly read that way. We are influenced by our teachers, so the inference is that this artist is still very young and has yet to hit her stride. (I try to limit the negative remarks, so I hide them instead.) Still, the work shows that she is on a good path.

    I can't imagine that you were referring to the photographer, but perhaps the photo seemed too facile for your taste.

    Yep, that taste thing gets in the way, but think of it this way: It's a reciprocal relationship. I don't like all art, not by a long shot, but I derive immense pleasure from some, even though often times my initial reaction to it is negative. It's a learning process, and that's what keeps me looking.

    ReplyDelete
  3. I was referring to the first one primarily. I think I can appreciate the esthetics of a design. How many times, as you say, can something be redone and remain viable?

    Thanks for the link to MOMA. It brought up a friend who is a designer. Never called himself an artist but it is there. Rene does, I guess, send a singular vision. Maybe there is some parallel. But, his also grinds my coffee each morning. ;-)

    http://www.moma.org/collection/browse_results.php?criteria=O%3AAD%3AE%3A4416&page_number=1&template_id=1&sort_order=1

    ReplyDelete
  4. Still waiting to hear some of your good stories about relatives.

    ReplyDelete