tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post474342277269430029..comments2024-03-28T22:57:07.128-04:00Comments on ILLUSTRATION ART: ART FRAUDDavid Apatoffhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11293486149879229016noreply@blogger.comBlogger115125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-30392191662713255382013-09-12T07:31:23.964-04:002013-09-12T07:31:23.964-04:00Nice post.
here valuable information.
Thanks for s...Nice post.<br />here valuable information.<br />Thanks for sharing with us.<br /><br /><a href="http://www.artmarketanalyses.com/content/aes" rel="nofollow">investors in art</a><br />Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13369905650589111781noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-2342200522935504492013-09-09T13:36:53.629-04:002013-09-09T13:36:53.629-04:00Paul Worley,
As bad as Fox News, merely liberal pr...Paul Worley,<br />As bad as Fox News, merely liberal propaganda? <br /><br />Wasn't it the Wall St. Journal that declared the nation state dead? Was WSJ expressing liberal, conservative, or global radicalism with the statement?<br /><br />Check out the leadership and past members of The Aspen Institute and you'll get over the left-right thing in a hurry. Radical globalism has no liberal and conservative. <br /><br />You are also confusing the rigors of the required education and work environment of Wall St. with possessing the moral high ground. Hard working people of different talents make this same mistake all the time.<br /><br />Next time the “Too Big To Fails” come with their hands out asking and getting trillions under the radar, including foreign banks, maybe they should be told to go home and pull up their bootstraps like everyone else. Then we can open up state banks as Karl Denninger suggested early on (and loan interest payments could serve local interests).Sean Farrellnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-60319474372760514352013-09-09T12:39:54.572-04:002013-09-09T12:39:54.572-04:00Paul Worley writes: "why do the majority of t...Paul Worley writes: "why do the majority of the posters on this topic arrogant enough to be able to place themselves in the shoes of executives and lawyers?!"<br /><br />Paul, I've spent 20 years as a senior partner in a large multinational law firm that is consistently rated one of the top firms in the country. In that capacity I have worked closely with top executives and board members at some of the largest corporations in the world. I'm not sure whether that makes me more qualified or less qualified to write on this subject.<br /><br />If at the end of this post you think my only message was, "I dont like wall street executives. They dont buy art from struggling artists," then perhaps I wasn't explicit enough, but perhaps you weren't reading carefully enough: in this case, the wall street executives DID buy art from a struggling artist, they just didn't realize it. They wouldn't touch his work when it was displayed on the sidewalk, but when the same artist displayed his work in a fancy frame using someone else's fancy name, it suddenly became worth millions of dollars. Doesn't that tell you anything at all about their criteria and their taste? <br /><br />Peter Haken wrote: "art [is in the eye of] the beholder."<br /><br />Within limits. David Apatoffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11293486149879229016noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-55983020848875308222013-09-08T17:06:30.151-04:002013-09-08T17:06:30.151-04:00Copies but still master pieces, art in the beholde...Copies but still master pieces, art in the beholderPeter Hakenhttp://www.peterhaken.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-78340642413505650242013-09-08T12:01:03.181-04:002013-09-08T12:01:03.181-04:00This article is redundant and it's gaping hole...This article is redundant and it's gaping holes are riddled with red hearings, ad homonyms. You place prejudice on wall street executives. No where in this article does it seem to negotiate the fact that these works were fraudulent. Furthermore it wasn't addressed how fraudulent art impacts the world today. This is merely liberal propaganda. Your just as bad as fox news. Because at the end of this post all I got out of it was. "I dont like wall street executives. They dont buy art from struggling artists."<br /><br />And why do the majority of the posters on this topic arrogant enough to be able to place themselves in the shoes of executives and lawyers?! Half of you dont have the wit, stomach, backbone to be half of either. Not to mention even a vague conception of what takes to even get started on a career like that.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03256665535101041621noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-37176429458269118812013-08-31T16:44:03.151-04:002013-08-31T16:44:03.151-04:00David,
Kandinsky was influenced by the Fauvists a...David, <br />Kandinsky was influenced by the Fauvists and he later moved to Paris. Paris was the hub, the place to be because it was where Duchamp, Picasso, Matisse, Kandinsky and others lived, even though many things were happening elsewhere. The Reds and Whites as backgrounds and squares by Malevich and Lissitsky were political statements.Sean Farrellnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-54813422196506234802013-08-31T13:12:16.728-04:002013-08-31T13:12:16.728-04:00Hi David,
To (possibly) clarify that last statemen...Hi David,<br />To (possibly) clarify that last statement, vitalism was a major influence in Emerson's transcendentalism and modern variations of pluralism, deconstructionism and other modern isms and vitalism is the belief that thought is an interference with the purity of being.<br /><br />In your next post, a fascination with the “Oceanic Feeling”, led to vitalism as the avenue of trying to re-live its mystery. But if it is a myth that thought and being are separate, it might help undue a lot of the damage rendered by vitalism.<br /> <br />Sean Farrellnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-4186434017380674282013-08-31T12:29:51.682-04:002013-08-31T12:29:51.682-04:00Hi David,
What you're saying is true. The abst...Hi David,<br />What you're saying is true. The abstract expressionists were scaling down the number of elements in order to create a limited environment to better observe how each reacted to the other and in such their individual qualities, beauty, movement and in some cases, intuitive or visceral level expressionism. Abstract art was to be art for artists. Well, that was some of the reasoning that followed in the heady decoupling of minimalism. <br /><br />The knockoffs quickly became the favorites of interior designers, but the original intent wasn't to create design products, though that's what it became as it worked well with incoming Japanese furniture and other modernism.<br /><br />In a funny way such was part of an earlier iconoclasm in Dutch reformation churches. The 20th century and Americanism itself was a kind of ongoing iconoclasm departing from the past for ever more spectacular inventions and social and interior autonomy, (individualism).<br /><br />Much of the idealism and promises in novelty, breaking barriers, and the “less is more” rejection of embellishments you bring up in the next post were an outgrowth of what later became the economics of creative destruction; the abandonment of old technologies for the new. That things were discovered isn't in doubt, but what exactly was left behind remains a mystery.<br /><br />Enlightenment rationalism, the optimism of individualism and the romantic fascination with the natural impulse which followed, was America's parting from the past, despite Greco-Roman revivalism including an unspecified Averroism in Deism. Novelty did enter with John Nelson Darby and the Scofield bible as you mentioned evangelicalism. <br /><br />The Americanism of both 19th and 20th century held to radical ideas preceding it in Hume, or even Auguste Comte's positivism around 1830. So it is was there in the 19th century and until we discover what we left behind, the dissolute art you deplore will continue as if the world had just begun. <br /><br />It is possible the separation of being and idea is a modern myth. At the very least, being necessitates a dialogue with oral or written language. Thanks for your response.<br /><br />Sean Farrellnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-84444357488659532152013-08-31T11:38:28.261-04:002013-08-31T11:38:28.261-04:00David Apatoff wrote: “Sometimes I think that these...David Apatoff wrote: <b>“Sometimes I think that these artists realized the jig was up, and that in another century their path would be a "beautiful dead end." After Bouguereau, how much more could artists polish and refine images? After the invention of photography, how much longer could artists perform their historical role documenting faces and events? If instead of the Tate Modern you continued to project the work of the Tate forward along the same axis, where do you think we'd be by now?”</b><br /><br />I agree. What has happened was inevitable and makes complete sense – A few clicks on the machine I’m typing on will bring in front of me almost any image the world has ever created. In other words, technology has changed the way we value images.<br /> <br />As you say, the handmade image lost most of its functional, utilitarian purpose with the march of progress. Modernism was an attempt to answer this in its pursuit of a plastic language divested of functional purpose which led to the abandonment of the mimetic effects entirely. But meaning's baby swam in that mimetic bath water… and the project floundered and finally failed.<br /><br />The market for the handmade image is now miniscule and elitist and shrinking with every year. It will eventually stabilise into a bastion exclusive to the very wealthy. The average picture-buying public of yore no longer exists to sustain most of those who now produce it. A new paradigm for why handmade images are made is being born. But, in my view, it will have little resemblance to the context surrounding why it was made before.chris bennetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02088693067960235141noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-37775039795014599582013-08-31T11:35:03.580-04:002013-08-31T11:35:03.580-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.chris bennetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02088693067960235141noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-22004223819651145752013-08-31T08:53:32.558-04:002013-08-31T08:53:32.558-04:00Etc, etc wrote, "The revolutionists think tha...Etc, etc wrote, "The revolutionists think that by annihilating the established order it is a given that something better or at least equal but different will come along, and that's just not often the case (Reign of Terror for example)."<br /><br />Agreed, but let's keep in mind that the age of revolution began as governments and societies became more effective at maintaining order. Mass media meant the message could be controlled better, technology meant that behavior could be monitored, police forces became more effective. Before long, governments didn't have to rely on haphazard pogroms to discourage troublemakers, they could load whole segments of the population into train cars, assign them serial numbers and bump them off wholesale in gas chambers. It was in that context that believers in revolutionary dialectic (from Marx to Marcuse) argued that extreme measures were warranted, even if you had to break a few eggs to make an omelet. As Tom noted in his comment, "A lot of violent reaction is a response to violent and oppressive social orders."<br /><br />Chris Bennett-- I agree with your point about Spencer, Nicholson and Moore, and like the way you portrayed it, in the transition from the Tate to the Tate Modern. But don't you wonder how long the artists in the original Tate could have continued along their traditional path? Sometimes I think that these artists realized the jig was up, and that in another century their path would be a "beautiful dead end." After Bouguereau, how much more could artists polish and refine images? After the invention of photography, how much longer could artists perform their historical role documenting faces and events? If instead of the Tate Modern you continued to project the work of the Tate forward along the same axis, where do you think we'd be by now?<br /><br />Tom-- Pardon me for smiling but "a book by two Frenchman... called 'How new York sold the idea of modern art'" is like Captain Renault being shocked to find gambling going on in Casablanca. Really?? French authors have discovered that taste can be a public relations game fueled by money and social status??? Imagine that! <br /><br />I know the folklore is that the "center of the art world" (or at least the "center of the art market") shifted from Paris to NY after Paris was disabled by WW II. But it seems to me that the migration started long before that. Seurat couldn't give away his masterpiece, La Grande Jatte, in his home country so some Chicago industrialist scooped it up for a song and brought it to the US in the 19th century. <br /><br />For me, the far more interesting contrast is not between NY and Paris but between NY and St. Petersburg. You could argue that Russian intellectuals such as Malevich's suprematists and Kandinsky's blue rider group invented modern art but it could not find fertile soil in a "revolutionary" country. Decades later when the seed was transplanted to the center of capitalism, voila! You have modern art! David Apatoffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11293486149879229016noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-32133254061050497662013-08-31T07:30:06.973-04:002013-08-31T07:30:06.973-04:00Etc, etc and Kev Ferrara-- Are you two guys sure y...Etc, etc and Kev Ferrara-- Are you two guys sure you didn't go to law school?<br /><br />Sean Farrell-- I wanted to circle back to your very interesting discussion of the "avalanche of unknowingness" in 20th century art and literature (from Eugene O'Neill to Kerouac). You write: <br /><br />"Abstract art, (which later just became a synonym for concept based art), was also part of the popularization of psychology and such art was supposed to unveil new and unknown languages, which of course never happened; much like deconstructionism is supposed to bring forth a flowering, without ever having seeded anything but annihilation of meaning and confusion. The abstract era was also marked by writers heralding impulse and violence."<br /><br />It seems to me that there was plenty of hard evidence in the 20th century to cause people to reconsider their faith in enlightenment era rationality and reason, and instead explore the subconscious, spirituality, impulse, superstition and LSD as possible paths forward. Start with quantum physics and the discovery that Isaac Newton's view of the world (which was a major underpinning for the enlightenment) was a magnificent delusion. Add to that World War I, which left the concept of human progress (another artifact of the enlightenment) in tatters as people realized that that the scientific revolution, the industrial revolution, and soon the technological revolution had provided us with the means to make the world far worse, while human ethics had not progressed at all). Third, we can add the development of the field of psychology, (from William James through Freud) which demonstrated that human thought and motivation are far murkier than we once suspected. It is no wonder that people began investigating alternative, non-rational paths; it would not have been reasonable for the world to believe in the Age of Reason any more. Could individual "impulse and violence" possibly land us in a worse spot than methodical, systematic technology and bureaucracy which brought us nuclear weapons and World War II?<br /><br />As further evidence, the great rebellion against the tools of reason was not confined to the arts you criticize. In religion, Christian fundamentalism was born in the US as an anti-rationalist response to science and technology. In science, there was a revolution in the philosophy of science in the 1950s and 60s as academics began to equate science with the military industrial complex (which seemed to be funding most of the science-- something Newton never dreamed of).<br /><br />So why shouldn't art, of all things, have a similar response to the revelations and terrors and disappointments of the early 20th century? In addition to all the tectonic shifts listed above, poets were concerned about the dehumanizing effects of what Charlie Chaplin called "Modern Times." <br /><br />Robert Motherwell (the poet of the abstract expressionists) wrote: "The emergence of abstract art is a sign that there are still men of feeling in the world .... Nothing as drastic as abstract art could have come into existence save as the consequence of a most profound, relentless, unquenchable need. The need is for felt experience -- intense, immediate direct, subtle, unified, warm, vivid, rhythmic."<br /><br />I agree with you that many of these trends turned out to be disappointing or unhelpful in the long run ("Thankfully, the whole thing has exhausted its welcome") but that doesn't mean that they didn't provide some useful counter balances and create some excellent work along the way. Tracey Emin and Jeff Koons may have beaten it into the ground (with the assistance of an ignorant and misguided viewing public) but intellectuals from Kandinsky and Malevich and Klee and Duchamp and Motherwell and Rothko started out doing exactly what you'd want pioneers to be doing under such circumstances, and I think created some beautiful work in the process. <br />David Apatoffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11293486149879229016noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-5127291057782451542013-08-29T17:54:08.673-04:002013-08-29T17:54:08.673-04:00Proud of you, Mr. Etc.
I agree the Munsell system...Proud of you, Mr. Etc.<br /><br />I agree the Munsell system isn't perfect, nor put together in a perfectly sound, scientific way. And it doesn't conform exactly to human sensitivities, as you mention. It is, however, really nice to have all those chips to play with. <br /><br />Regarding my color research, my suspicion is always that I am not discovering anything at all, only recovering what was known in that mythical year I call 1905. I perfectly understand how the specific claims I have made about color chords would be tough to swallow without visual proof. kev ferrarahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09509572970616136990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-16146227810000337072013-08-29T17:02:53.964-04:002013-08-29T17:02:53.964-04:00Kev,
I'll concede that it appears you may be r...Kev,<br />I'll concede that it appears you may be right and I am wrong regarding Munsell's distribution of hue. I did read the student edition and there was no mention of green sensitivity, nor does the Munsell circle seem to jive exactly with the eye color sensitivity curve you linked (according to which we are more sensitive to oranges than blues but the opposite is suggested by Munsell). At any rate, as far as your research goes, you should have no trouble overlooking an AARGHnorant one who remains skeptical until some evidence is presented, and perhaps even afterwards. It isn't the first time I've seen a color theory discovery touted as something that will be a game changer.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-15619819816763242122013-08-29T12:30:31.723-04:002013-08-29T12:30:31.723-04:00i think kevs point is that the munsell system is k...i think kevs point is that the munsell system is kind of systematic yet also kind of based on what humans can perceive. And that this is like the way the musical notes have been arranged too, mostly based on math but then "tempered" so it sounds right to the human ear. I don't see what etc is arguing about. Its self evident.chimesatmidnightnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-89493337669196230672013-08-29T11:54:07.828-04:002013-08-29T11:54:07.828-04:00The turquoise streak across a pinkish-orange hayst...<b>The turquoise streak across a pinkish-orange haystack found in a Monet is trying to ‘alter’ the colour chord of the haystack in a similar fashion. (‘Alter’; another musical expression as in ‘altered chords’ – my Debussy example being just such a case)</b><br /><br />In the texts of that era, this technique is called "modulation." Another obvious parallel between art and music.<br /><br /><b> If it were the case, then it would indicate that there is a significant deficiency in the normal human ability to detect hue in the red to yellow range</b><br /><br />Mr. Etc, are you aware that the human eye is more sensitive to green than any other color? And is in fact weak at perceiving reds? Does this chart help you any; http://www.amastro2.org/at/ot/othcs.html<br /><br />Again, you have gone off topic to pursue a picayune point which you are wrong about anyway.kev ferrarahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09509572970616136990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-86950148167697348712013-08-29T08:15:40.727-04:002013-08-29T08:15:40.727-04:00And my point was that these increments were chosen...<i>And my point was that these increments were chosen by perceptual polling.</i><br /><br />IF you would read the text with an open mind you would understand that what you are describing is not the case in regard to the way Munsell arranged hues. If it were the case, then it would indicate that there is a significant deficiency in the normal human ability to detect hue in the red to yellow range, as 5R to 5Y only occupies 1/5 of the circumference of the Munsell circle (obvious by simply looking at the link I provided above).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-72887342266294011462013-08-29T05:35:42.422-04:002013-08-29T05:35:42.422-04:00Kev wrote: “I've shared with long-time friend ...<b>Kev wrote: “I've shared with long-time friend and fellow poster here, artist Chris Bennett, a host of my research into the music of art and I think he will vouch for me when I claim that I successfully created tonalities and scales with color and was able to produce color chords using these scales that were akin in feeling to musical chords, including, I am proud to say, dom7 and maj6 jazz-type chords.”</b><br /><br />Indeed I can. For reasons Kev has already given to Laurence, I will not go into technical details. They are Kev’s intellectual property. But in terms of concrete examples/expressions of the truth of this idea I would say that one only has to look at the examples of Pissaro and Monet to see the effect. <br /><br />Pissarro lacked a feeling for chromatic scale with which to build his pictures, and subsequently they generally lack the sense of tonality, modality or key that one finds in the best of Monet’s pictures. Pissaro’s pictures are inexpressive and inert chromatically because they are ‘atonal’ in that there is no implied sense of scale/key. Monet’s pictures, on the other hand, are chromatically expressive through their dissonance tension within their implied sense of scale/key.<br /><br />The maj7#4 chord found in Debussy sounds piquant because the sweet resolution of the major seventh has a ‘sting in the tail’ of the sharp forth implying we are really in another key (the chord’s unstated fifth).<br /><br />The turquoise streak across a pinkish-orange haystack found in a Monet is trying to ‘alter’ the colour chord of the haystack in a similar fashion. (‘Alter’; another musical expression as in ‘altered chords’ – my Debussy example being just such a case)<br /> <br />PS: The tech stuff above has nothing to do with Kev’s researches – it is standard musical theory found in any textbook on harmony.<br />chris bennetthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02088693067960235141noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-13297873510255480792013-08-29T02:32:18.620-04:002013-08-29T02:32:18.620-04:00I feel the need to apologize in advance to Etc, Et...I feel the need to apologize in advance to Etc, Etc . If David ever organizes a meet and greet over dinner and drinks - and it happens to occur a block or so from where Etc,Etc resides , and Etc,Etc attends and introductions and made , and it turns out to be Ms or Mrs Etc , sorry for being presumptuous .<br /> Al McLuckieAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-22392897320704558572013-08-29T00:28:06.843-04:002013-08-29T00:28:06.843-04:00I've been through this argument many times wit...<b>I've been through this argument many times with many a fundaMunsellist who never seems to understand the system quite as well as they think they do. ;)</b><br /><br />I am not a stickler for Munsell in any way shape or form. That you think I am is the 4000th incorrect assumption you've made so far. Bloody boring dealing with. <br /><br />And what argument, pray tell, are you talking about?<br /><br />And have you made "this argument" on Rational Painting where I might be able to corroborate you claim?kev ferrarahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09509572970616136990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-51272499445858450852013-08-29T00:22:22.234-04:002013-08-29T00:22:22.234-04:00You've yanked us into another meaningless alle...You've yanked us into another meaningless alley, like a useless seeing eye dog that can't stop pursuing the smell of beef. In your case the beef is some kind of mania you have for catching me out. Bloody boring to deal with considering how AWFUL your reading comprehension is.<br /><br />That the Munsell system is broken up into 40 increments or ten and for whatever reason is a different matter than WHERE the increments fall just exactly within the system... And my point was that these increments were chosen by perceptual polling. In order that the color hue increments be systematized yet human-centric. Just like the way the 12 tone scale is both mathematically systematized and then refitted to key into human perceptual preferences. Which was the actual point I was making, which was relative to the actual discussion we had entered into. Alright? <br /><br />So you haven't disproven anything that I have said. What i was saying was correct. You've merely mixed up the notions of "how many increments the color wheel was divided into" versus "how those actual increment distances were chosen in the event." And then you argued against me on the basis of YOUR mental mix up. Meanwhile ignoring the larger point. ONCE AGAIN. <br /><br />Learn. How. To. Read. <br /><br />Think. Before. You. Write.<br /><br />Incidentally, it is stated in the 1905 "A Color Notation" that the ten colors were chosen because those ten colors are what children first recognize as distinct from one another.<br /><br />kev ferrarahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09509572970616136990noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-16269560252133987612013-08-28T23:47:28.530-04:002013-08-28T23:47:28.530-04:00P.S. Kev
I've been through this argument many...P.S. Kev<br /><br />I've been through this argument many times with many a fundaMunsellist who never seems to understand the system quite as well as they think they do. ;)Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-69605586560401969442013-08-28T23:42:35.067-04:002013-08-28T23:42:35.067-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-69435300144291339412013-08-28T23:20:26.550-04:002013-08-28T23:20:26.550-04:00The 40 colors are simply further divisions of the ...The <a href="http://thelandofcolor.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/07/Munsell-Color-Wheel.png" rel="nofollow">40 colors</a> are simply further divisions of the 10 color student color wheel. If you have read the book, even the humble student book, you would know Munsell did organize color by perception, but he made exceptions for reasons I have already explained when he arranged the hues.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-33153998014009317072013-08-28T23:06:03.979-04:002013-08-28T23:06:03.979-04:00There are forty increments in the Munsell big book...There are forty increments in the Munsell big book of colors, the one used by painters. The spacing between the 40 increments were arrived at through extensive testing of how human subjects were able to perceive equivalent increments of color across the spectrum. This is the reason for some bands being more squashed than others.<br /><br />Can somebody besides Mr. Etc corroborate or refute. Thanks.<br /><br />That this is so, however, is off topic, once again.kev ferrarahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09509572970616136990noreply@blogger.com