| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
PeterBrown
Guest
|
 Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 10:11 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Jim wrote: | | Let's just get on and make some, shall we? |
With respect Jim, one doesn't 'make' art -- one 'creates' it!  |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
rosiepots
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 31, 2007 8:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Withrespect to you too Peter; to create; is to make something, to bring something into existance. To use imagination to invent things or produce works of art. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mark chaldecott
Regular
Joined: 18 Feb 2007
Posts: 74
Location: portsmouth,UK
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 1:13 pm Post subject: The what is Art debate. |
|
|
I have had a good read of this topic. Art must encompass all things. I mean, my personal philosophy on the matter is that art is not just one word or term. I prefer to see it as an abbreviation; A.R.T.
To denote All Relevant Things. From an individual perspective of course. To me an object of art could be an 'onion' or a painting of a 'rubbish tip'. So now what becomes relevant is the onion etc. Another person might think, 'I don't think that 'rubbish tip' painting is art'. But the fact is: is that it is.
What becomes 'relevant' to the individual may well be 'art'. Good or Bad art doesn't come into it. We artists are not in competition with each other...because art takes on many forms as has already been discussed.
In my opinion, there will be no conclusive maxim that sums up once and for all the answer to the question, 'what is art'.
_________________
Professional Painter.
CHALDECOTT'S GALLERY www.mark-chaldecott.com
Saatchi. http://www.saatchi-gallery.co.uk/showdown/index.php?showpic=62257 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
linzi.b
Regular
Joined: 28 Jun 2007
Posts: 127
Location: Preston, lancs. UK
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 7:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | the expression or application of creative skill & imagination |
Yeah and a lot of the rubbish that tries to pass itself off as art these days, deffinatly doesnt use that. 
_________________
From,
Lyndsay Bullock.
My website- http://www.freedm2.com/lyndsayb |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
linzi.b
Regular
Joined: 28 Jun 2007
Posts: 127
Location: Preston, lancs. UK
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 7:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| rosiepots wrote: | | Withrespect to you too Peter; to create; is to make something, to bring something into existance. To use imagination to invent things or produce works of art. |
Or pile up a load of old books.golly gosh
_________________
From,
Lyndsay Bullock.
My website- http://www.freedm2.com/lyndsayb |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mark chaldecott
Regular
Joined: 18 Feb 2007
Posts: 74
Location: portsmouth,UK
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 8:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| linzi.b wrote: | | Quote: | | the expression or application of creative skill & imagination |
Yeah and a lot of the rubbish that tries to pass itself off as art these days, definitely doesn't use that. |
There's certainly a 'nail on the head' type of truth there too linzi. But we as artists (we people with open minds) have to 'define' what we call rubbish ourselves. I mean; I'll try and clarify. What I would define as rubbish art when I observe some so called art might not be quite so rubbish to someone else. To another person it might be fantastic art.
I think a way around this problem argument is to think down the middle so to speak. I think some people have exploited true art. They have monopolized a cow pat splat on a canvas which probably only took 2 minutes to produce and they sell the Art for loads of money. But, someone out there must have bought it!!
_________________
Professional Painter.
CHALDECOTT'S GALLERY www.mark-chaldecott.com
Saatchi. http://www.saatchi-gallery.co.uk/showdown/index.php?showpic=62257 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rosiepots
Guest
|
| Posted: Sun Aug 05, 2007 9:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| linzi.b wrote: | | rosiepots wrote: | | Withrespect to you too Peter; to create; is to make something, to bring something into existance. To use imagination to invent things or produce works of art. |
Or pile up a load of old books.golly gosh |
for lack of intelligence and rudeness, i have not piled up a pile of old books!!!! they are not rubbish, 'look' further at the work and stop being so narrow minded and slagging people off!! these are ceramic books, which took months to produce, along with the concept, also months of research to produce surface finishes which is not rubbish and requires a lot of techincal skill and patience. So until you really know how to criticise then i suggest you leave for people who can do it objectively with out telling them their work is rubbish eh. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ArtyTed
Jedi Knight
Joined: 17 Nov 2006
Posts: 2942
Location: Warwickshire
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 06, 2007 10:38 am Post subject: |
|
|
_________________
Traditional shaving blog: http://www.bruceonshaving.com/
Last edited by ArtyTed on Wed Aug 08, 2007 5:41 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mood indigo
Genius
Joined: 17 Jan 2007
Posts: 1560
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 06, 2007 10:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
for me art needs to be creative (and Rosie your books, though I haven't seen them, sound as if they are) with something of yourself, an originality, skill, your own vision - NOT simply copying subject matter or pastiches of other artists work but developing your own ideas.
It can be anything - conceptual, impressionist, expressionist, abstract, photorealist - whatever.
It needs to have something to say even if it's as simple as wow! look at these colours, this view or more complex - political comment or deeper issues.
There is room for Rothko (colour interactions), Turner/Impressionists (light and colour), Rembrandt (in depth portraits), Morandi (subtle minimalism), Gillian Ayres (joie de vivre), Lucian Freud (biting incisive work), Rose Hilton (dreamy colourist works), Richad Long (beautiful conceptual work), Van Gogh (use of colour and marks), Kurt Jackson (abstracted contemporary landscapes full of light), John Virtue (huge wonderful drawings) and a million others. All entirely different and all with their own voice. No slavish copying or abiding by the 'rules' - rules usually dictated by others with less talent , understanding or knowledge. The salon refused to show the Impressionists work for instance.
I'm not a fan of a great deal of conceptual art but some is really interesting.
I went (slightly reluctantly but determined to keep an open mind) to an exhibition by a Chinese artist at the University of Warwick last year. She'd collected stuff from students and all the departments of the university that they were throwing out - filing cabinets, old glasses from lost property, computers, books and zillion odd objects from tiny to huge,
They she'd rearranged them in drifts and shapes and towers with pathway through in a very large gallery, cleverly lit ....
... it was BEAUTIFUL and amazing and I would have love to have stayed for a long time drawing there. I loved it and it made as much impression on me and the friends with me (painters like me, not conceptual artists) as the superb Van Gogh drawings we'd been to see at Compton Verney just before it.
_________________
website: http://vivienblackburn.com
blog: http://vivienb.blogspot.com/
http://www.watermarks-art.com the book: http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/detail/218005/?utm_source=badge&utm_medium=banner&utm_content=140x240 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rosiepots
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Aug 06, 2007 11:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mood indigo wrote: | for me art needs to be creative (and Rosie your books, though I haven't seen them, sound as if they are) with something of yourself, an originality, skill, your own vision - NOT simply copying subject matter or pastiches of other artists work but developing your own ideas.
It can be anything - conceptual, impressionist, expressionist, abstract, photorealist - whatever.
It needs to have something to say even if it's as simple as wow! look at these colours, this view or more complex - political comment or deeper issues.
There is room for Rothko (colour interactions), Turner/Impressionists (light and colour), Rembrandt (in depth portraits), Morandi (subtle minimalism), Gillian Ayres (joie de vivre), Lucian Freud (biting incisive work), Rose gosh (dreamy colourist works), Richad Long (beautiful conceptual work), Van Gogh (use of colour and marks), Kurt Jackson (abstracted contemporary landscapes full of light), John Virtue (huge wonderful drawings) and a million others. All entirely different and all with their own voice. No slavish copying or abiding by the 'rules' - rules usually dictated by others with less talent , understanding or knowledge. The salon refused to show the Impressionists work for instance.
I'm not a fan of a great deal of conceptual art but some is really interesting.
I went (slightly reluctantly but determined to keep an open mind) to an exhibition by a Chinese artist at the University of Warwick last year. She'd collected stuff from students and all the departments of the university that they were throwing out - filing cabinets, old glasses from lost property, computers, books and zillion odd objects from tiny to huge,
They she'd rearranged them in drifts and shapes and towers with pathway through in a very large gallery, cleverly lit ....
... it was BEAUTIFUL and amazing and I would have love to have stayed for a long time drawing there. I loved it and it made as much impression on me and the friends with me (painters like me, not conceptual artists) as the superb Van Gogh drawings we'd been to see at Compton Verney just before it. |
Thank you for this reply, yes my books and art are conceptual, but also I research into surface treatments which has taken me over fours years to achieve this, thousands of kiln firings, glaze technology, experiments with different clays etc, along with developing my practice and ideas. I am talking about intensive research too, and studying art history, modernism and post modernism, alongside the many many various mediums used to produce art. If more people were like you and just opened their minds to art which is not just a painted picture or copied drawing then maybe they would 'see' more clearly, als o to actually' look at the thought processes and skill needed to produce this art.
I have taken a look at your work too, it is beautiful and alive! I am studying landscape at the moment and looking into why artists have an affinty with the landscape, what it is they are responding to and how? Any comments welcome  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by p h p B B
|
ArtForums.co.uk
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
