tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post6872146052419286305..comments2024-03-28T11:11:58.563-04:00Comments on ILLUSTRATION ART: ONE LOVELY DRAWING, part 25David Apatoffhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11293486149879229016noreply@blogger.comBlogger72125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-43400835566200172182009-05-18T03:26:00.000-04:002009-05-18T03:26:00.000-04:00Rob, I agree with you about the huge importance of...Rob, I agree with you about the huge importance of line, and also with your point that Brodner's drawing was made with a tool that leaves a fairly monotonous line, a line that is inherently less interesting (and has less potential) than one left by a more sensitive tool. I further agree that the long strokes on the front of Diogenes are by far the weakest part of the drawing. All excellent points. <br /><br />So why do I still like this drawing so much?<br /><br />Line is important, but drawings can still be interesting even if made with a stick in the earth, or with shoe polish in a prison cell, or sprayed on a concrete wall with spray paint, or rubbed with a clump of colored earth on a cave wall. Despite the lack of sensitivity and variety in their line, these drawings can have an excellence of their own. They might have a great design or a potent message or some other compensating virtue. In this case, I think Brodner's drawing is smart and funny for the reasons I mentioned. Keep in mind that this was not some formal commissioned piece, but one of a series of quick, informal sketches he did on a lark to accompany an interview. I give him props for spontaneity, and also for love of drawing. You and other commenters seem to have become distracted by his "lefty" stereotypes, but I think the better interpretation of this drawing centers on Diogenes; the center of this drawing is the facial expression of the man who is shocked to discover how truth seekers are treated in this society, and what little regard people have for the light he thinks he is shedding. (By the way, I think those feeble little lines from the lantern do an excellent job of conveying how feeble Brodner thinks the light is-- this is not a one way joke at the expense of the capitalist). But I think the viewer is supposed to relate to the expression on the face of Diogenes; there is nothing to relate to in the dull gaze of the lout. <br /><br />I'm sure you would not write off the different types of drawings I described above just because they don't look like Renaissance drawings. I agree that standards are not an illusion and that unbridled relativism is the path to stupidity, but I also believe that the Renaissance you describe resulted in large part from openness to new ideas and different cultural traditions. People went beyond their orthodoxy; the straightjacket of western biblical tradition, loosened by the great plague and other developments, cross fertilized with ancient Greek philosophical traditions, with islamic influence as a catalyst. With all due respect to the importance of filters, I think that the true Renaissance spirit looks at this drawing to see what things of value might reside there in unconventional form. <br /><br />Or, in the words of Seneca, "If you judge, investigate."David Apatoffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11293486149879229016noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-79266002905670153612009-05-17T15:22:00.000-04:002009-05-17T15:22:00.000-04:00Wow....you guys really get into it!Wow....you guys really get into it!emikkhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01995855960754932743noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-33803698436723429992009-05-17T09:54:00.000-04:002009-05-17T09:54:00.000-04:00I actually agree with you Rob. As I said before, I...I actually agree with you Rob. As I said before, I am no cultural relativist, and nor am I a relativist in any general sense (though I am not a modernist either). I believe in absolutes, even in the art field. Brodner is no Rembrandt, Picaso, Searle, and while I liked the drawing, I think dfernetti was maybe being over eager in saying that the picture shows great craftmanship (I think great might be too strong). I also think that when you, Rob, say something, it is worth listening to. You have the experience and education and all the other credentials that point to you having put in the hard yards to know what you are talking about.<br /><br />I also know enough about my own work that it is always gonna be third rate compared to some of the real pro's out there. Check out my own blog to see what i am experimenting with (whoa... a plug?). It ain't particularly good but I enjoy it. I can't make a living from it (i've tried), but I enjoy illustration, and looking at illustration. I might, I hope, get better at it. What I am trying to say is that I try to hold myself up to certain standards, and in doing so have to hold other illustrators up to those same standards. <br /><br />Some of these standards are universal i.e. I am not ever going to paint a self portrait of such technical craftsmanship, or personal insight, as a later self portrait by Rembrandt. In fact I am not going to equal early Rembrandt.<br /><br />I suspect some of these standards are more personal i.e. Edward Lear. I suspect Edward Lear is not high on anyone else's list of top illustrators (except Edward Gorey, who also rather liked edward lear's illustrations). But to me, his nonsense illustrations are what cartoonist should be aspiring to (which suggests of course that i think it should be a universal standard). There is something to his drawings that suggest they were dashed off like some people write letters. There is a pure expresion of his idea. Im not quite sure how to say that any better (and yes, i am aware that it stinks off the moralistic/quasi religious terms you rightly abhore). I think Stieg and Feiffer succeed in achieving the same thing. It isn't as easy as it looks. But this is something I have studied and looked at (and attempted) enough to have a pretty solid grasp of it.<br /><br />I think the Brodner piece has also succeeded in this. Not to the same level as stieg and others, but it is there.<br /><br />I haven't mentioned that i am not unschooled. I studied art, with a focus on illustration, at university. I studied under some pretty excacting teachers. One of those teachers was Armin Greder, who, though being a lefty, was no relativist (I would recomend checking out his work). Again, this is to say that I am not approaching this with any relativistic viewpoint. It is informed (at least to some degree) and objective. I might not have all the right terms, but the ideas are there.Matthew Adamshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06954050440829792514noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-80093552068972536622009-05-17T06:08:00.000-04:002009-05-17T06:08:00.000-04:00Matthew, there is a very big problem that sort of ...Matthew, there is a very big problem that sort of relativism does not address. Indeed, that lack of standards lies at the very heart of relativism. In the egalitarian desire to give every opinion equal weight, you assign equal validity to the opinions of teacher and student alike..expert and neophyte. It's as if Everyman's <I>unschooled opinion</I> on the technical operation of a complex machine is given equal weight to that of a skilled engineer or mechanic. We see that with cockamamie alternate medical advice being proffered and believed over that of peer review physicians...all because it was seen on Oprah. Our society is being informed by gossips over the electronic clothesline.<br /><br />Perhaps no other field of human endeavor is so rife with poorly founded personal opinion...with so many ill-educated gossips as is the field of Art. Yes, there's bound to be honest disagreement between peers but the culture of the relativist art world is such as to allow equal weight to those who...if they had to save their lives could not produce work that will remain memorable after the viewer walks away, let alone for a length of time.<br /><br />The biggest mystery about art is that there are very few mysteries. <br /><br />Until it declined in skill and art schools became some sort of dumping ground for confused youth who didn't know what to do after high school (most art schools are just holding areas preparatory to the times the students leaving the portfolio in the closet and getting a "real job." In other words, a place to get an MFA in a hobby). That could be why graduates of art schools are unlikeley to ever get work being paid to make art...not teach it to the next generation of unfortunates.<br /><br />With that as a background and with the pursuit of art spoken of in moralistic and even quasi-religious terms (not artistic terms because most practitioners don't even know the artistic terms and standards), there is little wonder than there's no Renaissance on the immediate horizon. The sad truth is there's not even a Lascaux on the horizon. The sea of artistic mediocrity in which we currently swim (and drown) is directly attributable to a reticence to address art as if there were more to it that ill-founded personal opinion that holds the same weight as views based on real scholarship.<br /><br />There really are standards based on repeatable effects.Rob Howardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07587811799010051018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-56929839639352669822009-05-17T00:45:00.000-04:002009-05-17T00:45:00.000-04:00I suspect we all understand what dfernetti was say...I suspect we all understand what dfernetti was saying, and agree or disagree to various degrees with his comment. He thinks it is great craftsmanship, and it is obvious that you don't, Rob. No problem with communication as far as I can see.Matthew Adamshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06954050440829792514noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-41458076922569094852009-05-16T22:34:00.000-04:002009-05-16T22:34:00.000-04:00Okay, let's get down to some nitty gritty technica...Okay, let's get down to some nitty gritty technical stuff...the line work. <br />First, it's an absolutely mechanical line like a Rapidograph or Pentel would make. The problem with those unvarying lines is that they don't allow any indecision where you go slightly off and then recover. A flexible pen allows you to get away with that sort of recovery (although there are other limitations to that tool). Perhaps the most forgiving of wandering and recovery is a brush.<br /><br />Where that lack of sureness is very apparent is in a series of long strokes in the front of the jacket. <br /><br />One of the signs of a bad painter is when they paint the entire picture with one brush. Every strokes is the same width and shape and the overall look is stacatto and boring, as is this drawing. There's so much indecision around the face that it drains away whatever character it might have had in skilled hands...that and the stubbly little pecks and dots (again, all done to the same pen width). The stubble in the hand is gratuitous and frankly thoughtless.<br /><br />The technical pen has never revealed been the choice of skilled raughtsman and, when dfernetti stated in the initial response that this had touches of great craftsmanship, I suspect those are very private terms like calling the sky doo-doo-ga-ga and trees moopy-boopy...private words that worked well for a kid but we hoped he'd outgrow.<br /><br />We are going to have to return to common definitions if we are going to communicate. If language becomes so realtivist that this sort of thing is even remotely considered as showing great craftsmanship, civilization may well be lost as we descend into our private forms of autistic relativism...doo-doo-ga-ga?Rob Howardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07587811799010051018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-25398652736713302992009-05-15T19:56:00.000-04:002009-05-15T19:56:00.000-04:00Is this actually a meaningful joke? Or just a witt...Is this actually a meaningful joke? Or just a witty one? <br /><br />I like Brodner's art a great deal, even though I often detest the simple mindedness of populist politics. A cynical snark is not erudition, rather it is often just a mask over the lack of it. And I think his addled wholly-encased-in-the-partisan-bubble education was, and is, actually received directly from television, which is a scary thought when you realize how he is setting about trying to form the opinions of the masses. Having said that, everybody's entitled to their opinions and I do find his caricatures to be awe-inspiring and hilarious sometimes. <br /><br />Leaving that aside, I'm not quite sure there is any kind of deep joke here. Because there is no great analogy here. In what way are fat cats metaphorically "lighting their cigars" by the torch-lights of those in search of an honest man? Who are these people in search of an honest man? College kids? The News Media? Mr. Brodner himself? (A partisan like Mr. Brodner believes that which he is told. Which can have no relationship to the truth at all. Of course, a partisan always thinks their the very fount of Pravda, their select source unimpeachable, but nevermind.) <br /><br />So, if these are the people being represented, possibly, in the person of diogenes, what is their torch light a symbol of? The internet? The pen? I really don't know because the metaphoric connection doesn't map properly. The only actual analogy is that the Fat Cats are oblivious or utterly disinterested or even contemptuous of the symbolic light that come from diogenes' torch. But in what sense is that true? Again, who is Diogenes representing? And if we can't figure out who he is representing, this actually isn't a very good piece of communication. The use of "lighting his cigar on the torch" imagery actually implies a deeper bit of significance that isn't there. <br /><br />And I have to say, I'm iffy on the drawing on this one too. I don't feel any light coming out of that torch, which is essential to the telling of the story. And I couldn't even identify what the fat cat was holding or what he was doing on first sight of the picture. I dunno. I just don't think this is one of his better pieces.kev ferraranoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-32670728808851192282009-05-15T15:43:00.000-04:002009-05-15T15:43:00.000-04:00Rob-- Hah! My word salad will have been worthwhil...Rob-- Hah! My word salad will have been worthwhile if it does no more than enable me to claim on my epitaph, "he reduced Rob Howard to saying, 'I don't know how to respond.'" <br /><br />We could continue our escalation of examples ("You're going to dismiss World War I and the Nazi holocaust as merely 'a few bad examples?' Well, chew on a little gulag archipelago....")but I think the overall point, on which I hope we can both agree, is that any philosophy of the world that can fit in a nutshell belongs in one. <br /><br />It is difficult enough to chart the cause and effect from the spread of western technology (where you at least have a patent system clocking who invented what, where and when). But when you start drawing conclusions about the cause and effect of ideals, styles and tastes, you'll have a hard time proving to a jury that the colonial benefits of orderly civil government were definitely "caused" by western ideas, while the horrors of Marxism were definitely not. (Not that I want to discourage you from trying, as it is sure to be entertaining. I am not greedy-- I have had my moment in the sun, confounding you to the point where you didn't know how to respond. I didn't expect it to last forever.)<br /><br />Or, we could save it for that dinner.David Apatoffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11293486149879229016noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-51227710991151629252009-05-15T14:53:00.000-04:002009-05-15T14:53:00.000-04:00>>>…World War I and the Nazi death camps…...>>><I>…World War I and the Nazi death camps…. the gulag archipelago, the cultural revolution and the khmer rouge were all products of a 100% European ideology, born, bred and patented in the west by historians, academics and utopians from Jules Michelet, Robert Owen and Charles Fourier to those fun loving Germans, Marx and Engels. the "gifts" of Enrico Fermi, Albert Einstein and J. Robert Oppenheimer? …the genocide of 40 million, or even 100 million, in the killing fields and the gulags and the death camps…</I><<<<br /><br />Phew!!! I can only say that I am absolutely bemused and don't know how to respond or scrape any of that off the wall. What that barrage of loosely related cultural jeremiads sparked to mind were long dormant memories of a warped youth.<br />I try to put the horror behind me but, by age 5 my parents had concluded that I had grown fat and lazy with too much of the good life and, being legally prevented from sending me off to be raised by wolves they did the next best thing...they packed me off to the Jesuits before my sixth birthday And there I remained in their care until I graduated their version of junior high school. The horror, the horror!<br /><br />As I say, I try to bury those memories along with that damnable Latin, Greek and Hebrew, but your flurry of word salad brought the horror rushing back with a vengeance...especially the horror of the Jebbies insistence on logical constructs (along with learning the the French and Polish notational systems that Wm. Buckley was famously jotting down as his guests were to be hoist on their own petard).<br /><br />All of that came back with a rush...along with the damnable Latin...argumentum ad crumenem, a dicto secundum quid ad dictum simpliciter, argumentum ad misericordiam, a few red herrings and the ever popular post hoc ergo propter hoc. I tell you, I was beset by Latin phrases...even silly ones like the Hogwarts motto <I>Draco dormiens nunquam titillandus, </I>which you, in effect, did by tickling awake this sleeping dragon.<br /><br />I'm still shaking from the experience. How could you pack that many logical fallacies in one paragraph? Yikes!Rob Howardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07587811799010051018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-37315228075329944032009-05-14T19:31:00.000-04:002009-05-14T19:31:00.000-04:00Rob, I had to smile at your reaction to my offerin...Rob, I had to smile at your reaction to my offering up the old standards, World War I and the Nazi death camps. Many would argue that WWI was the point when the sun finally set on the age of reason, causing western culture to recoil into the arms of surrealism and other more virulent forms of noncognitivism. Yet, you seem undaunted and dismiss such watersheds as "the occasional bad examples of Western culture." We can keep going with examples, if you'd like: the gulag archipelago, the cultural revolution and the khmer rouge were all products of a 100% European ideology, born, bred and patented in the west by historians, academics and utopians from Jules Michelet, Robert Owen and Charles Fourier to those fun loving Germans, Marx and Engels. That seems to be a perfect example of your point about great western ideas finding fertile soil around the world. Unfortunately, at least 40 million souls perished in the 20th century alone as a result. <br /><br />And we haven't even come to the worst potential legacy of colonialism: what are Pakistan and North Korea going to do with the "gifts" of Enrico Fermi, Albert Einstein and J. Robert Oppenheimer? That problem may yet dwarf all "the occasional bad examples" of the 20th century combined. Perhaps you and I will be the ones wearing loincloths and eating roots and grubs, eh? <br /><br />I agree with you that colonization was not the unalloyed destruction of marvelously Doric lands where the lion laid with the lamb. In fact, I grant you that life in most of those countries was often nasty, brutish and short, and that colonization dramatically raised the standard of living for most of those populations. Those countries that were most effective in purging the residue of colonialism now seem to live with the greatest superstition and darkness. <br /><br />I also agree with you that "the bottom line is just that, the bottom line…the sum total," but now you're going to have to explain to me how your balance sheet weighs a better quality of life for the many against the genocide of 40 million, or even 100 million, in the killing fields and the gulags and the death camps. Sure there was wanton home grown slaughter before the colonial overlords showed up, but it seems that prometheus from the west has raised the ante several times over. <br /><br />One area where I will gladly and wholeheartedly join with you is your point about applied art. There are clearly downsides to having a client or an art director second guessing the artwork they are paying for. And if you are designing or decorating shoes or a box, you can bet their function will impose compromises in form and imagination. But those limitations and disadvantages seem to help us by rescuing us from the self-indulgent, decadent, nonsensical crap in which we seem inclined to wallow if left alone too long. It is occasionally worth giving up the facade of divine artistic inspiration for the chance to be useful again.David Apatoffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11293486149879229016noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-67495928250081619292009-05-14T18:35:00.000-04:002009-05-14T18:35:00.000-04:00Wouldn't want to slander Harold Gray, because I en...Wouldn't want to slander Harold Gray, because I enjoy his storytelling. He will creep me out occasionally though, with his sadism, just like Chester Gould in "Dick Tracy." <br /><br />McNelly I found more "centrist," in an American way, a bit like Herblock and imitators. Frazetta's politics might be wingnut, but his world of barbarians is so far removed from ours. Maybe Frank Miller and his version of Batman. <br /><br />When I think of right wing, I think of "Mallard Fillmore," or the people who draw obvious stereotypes, and then complain about "political correctness" when others squawk. Happily, few cartoonists lecture. R. Crumb does, Al Capp did, and so does Dave Sim. <br /><br />Even those Men's mags of the 50s and Reader's Digest were pretty political. <br /><br />It's a fine line. Popeye or Mickey Mouse had a point of view (thinking of my "Smithsonian Comics Collection".) They'd be much more boring without, or trying to appeal to a biggest common denominator. <br /><br />Walt Kelly is one of my illustrator heroes. Him and Dr. Seuss. You can say a lot of edgy stuff through cute animals. <br /><br />Dictatorships of any stripe can't tolerate those "pictures." (like Tammany Hall vs. Thomas Nast) That's why I'm dismayed at the decimation of political cartooning, just when it's most needed. (but think of the effect that images, like that Obama poster, still have to move people! )Jack Ruttanhttp://mruttan.canoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-46337299025025405812009-05-14T15:07:00.000-04:002009-05-14T15:07:00.000-04:00Jack, the politics of art is a whole different pan...Jack, the politics of art is a whole different pandora's box, but absolutelty fascinating. I am a big fan of Harold Gray and won't hear him slandered, but if you want another example of a great right wing cartoonist, I offer you Jeff MacNelly. Walt Disney was certainly right wing (although a different kind of cartoonist). And Frazetta was a comic artist more than a cartoonist, but his politics are hilariously right wing-- real simple minded Rush Limbaugh stuff. He is a brilliant artist, but when he opens his mouth to talk politics it's hard to keep from laughing. <br /><br />I agree with you that the best cartoonists through history have tended to have a subversive streak: Oliphant, Searle, Daumier, Szyk, Walt Kelly, Grosz, Scarfe, Kollwitz, as well as the bullpens of most satirical magazines, such as Simplicissimus (home of the great Heinrich Kley), Jugend, MAD and others. <br /><br />Why is that? Perhaps left wing dictatorships are just more effective at stifling cartoonists, but I don't think so.David Apatoffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11293486149879229016noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-71884247961143206952009-05-14T14:33:00.000-04:002009-05-14T14:33:00.000-04:00I have to say I'm not a Steve Brodner fan. He's a ...I have to say I'm not a Steve Brodner fan. He's a bit like Gerald Scarfe to me, in that he unleashes so much bile on his minor characters you wonder what he's going to do with someone truly despicable, and then it's disappointing. <br /><br />But Dave, you're allowed your quirks! I enjoy this debate.<br /> <br />Just skimming the comments, and someone was complaining about the lousiness of "left-wing cartoons." Come on: The Masses, Bill Mauldin.... just to start. I'm sorry -- the best cartoonists have been on the side of the underdog. <br /><br />What's (who's) a good right-wing cartoon(ist)? Little Orphan Annie? Al Capp? Anyhow, hope the guy got set straight somewhere I didn't read.Jack Ruttanhttp://mruttan.canoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-88389242503463721802009-05-14T08:16:00.000-04:002009-05-14T08:16:00.000-04:00Wow, David...maybe you and Rob should do your own ...Wow, David...maybe you and Rob should do your own version of My Dinner With Andre? You could both discuss Frazetta, Koons, Panter and anyone else that comes up...sounds like a winner!<br /><br />I had been getting Brodner's posts during the election and they were always entertaining and usually incredibly well drawn. The one you show here, as much as I like Brodner, does seem a little slapdash...but still better than most could do. The guy is damn good, that's for sure.kenmeyerjrhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01135259184687057130noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-67281613625612631152009-05-13T23:38:00.000-04:002009-05-13T23:38:00.000-04:00Prehaps you should dispell the flock of sheep from...Prehaps you should dispell the flock of sheep from your own mind, before dispelling the wool from your brother's mind.<br /><br />To deny the social commentry aspect of Grosz's work is... like denying the earth is round. Sure as hell Grosz did porn, but he also did works like Vorsich, nicht stolpern, and Aus eigner Kraft.Matthew Adamshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06954050440829792514noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-40873707536736284102009-05-13T22:43:00.000-04:002009-05-13T22:43:00.000-04:00>>When it comes to Grosz, he tended to bring...>>When it comes to Grosz, he tended to bring out what was ugly in society, and then made it more ugly so that we would really notice it. There is the beauty of truth in it, and I love his work, but there is not a lot of it I can call beautiful (though i can certianly pick out elements of his line which is beautiful).<<<<br /><br />Let's not overlook the many large erections that kept popping up in Grosz's "social commentary." Perhaps the old Little Blue Book collections of crudely drawn pornography (who knew that Olive Oyle looked like that with her clothes off?) were also social commentary about the little guy getting screwed by a big, turgid government.<br /><br />So, what about all of the flat-out porn that Grosz did (they guys never even took off their hats)? How is this a reflection by a sensitive artist on the state of affairs during the Weimar days? For every drawing we misconstrue as some masterpiece of social commentary was another piece of porn...not symbolic porn...just good old steamy, sweaty porn that did not have the redeeming artistic values of Schiele.<br /><br />There's plenty of Grosz drawings around. Of course they have been edited to make the point that he was a powerful anti-Nazi. Funny how we buy into our preconceived comfortable notions.<br /><br />A little art history goes a long way in dispelling the wool from our minds.Rob Howardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07587811799010051018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-14679682762212193692009-05-13T22:30:00.000-04:002009-05-13T22:30:00.000-04:00David, I’ve long suspected that you and I would en...David, I’ve long suspected that you and I would enjoy entertaining each other over dinner, so whenever your travels take you to Boston, please try to make arrangements that we can expand on these discussions. I agree that the bumpersticker quality of online exchanges often renders discussion down to percussion and concussion. However, I feel that it’s less the function of the medium than being emblematic of this current age of mankind (I resolutely resist multi-tasking, or as it is known in clinical parlance, Attention Deficit Disorder).<br />A number of issues you bring up are worth expanding upon. Others are a bit too obvious, such as citing the occasional bad examples of Western culture. While it’s fashionable to think of colonization as an unalloyed destruction of marvelously Doric lands where the lion laid with the lamb, a cursory glance at what was wrought upon this land when it was colonized should turn the argument. We backwoodsmen, trappeurs, second sons, adventurers and dirt farmers…the also-rans and castoffs of Europe inherited the glowing Age of Enlightenment and, making native variations in the reading of it, produced a successful nation unlike that ever seen. The student clearly surpassed the master.<br />Whilst not all colonies enjoyed similar successes, the vast, vast majority saw greatly improved daily lives ranging from the adoption of a steel plow all the way to institutions of higher learning. <br />As a society based on technology, our default position s to look through the lens of Science and even subject unlikely areas of life such as Art, Love, Poetry and Spirituality to being measured by the inappropriate yardstick of scientific proofs. Self-help books and nostrums to the contrary, a scientific approach is unlikely to help your children love and respect you. Yet there currently exist children who look upon their parents with deep love and true (not instilled) respect. When was the last time that you overhead a kid bragging about his Dad? Those qualities and attributes fall well outside the measurements of science (although, given some grant money, you may be assured that some people will turn it into a study with the appropriate publish-or-perish findings).<br />But discussions of comparative cultures is neither here nor there. Just as some races are taller and more gracile, like the elegant Watusi, an equally ineluctable fact is that some cultures have produced far more to advance mankind than have others. Yes, they also made mistakes. So what? The bottom line is just that, the bottom line…the sum total, and the reality is that western culture has come to dominate the world, not because we produce endless hordes of screaming warriors bent on destruction, but because what westerners have produced is so attractive and obviously worthwhile that it makes good sense to put up with their funny accents and awful food in order to get the electric pump that will irrigate the village and bring prosperity. It’s also good to bear in mind that most emerging cultures adhere to the old actor’s dictum…”It’s not so much that I get the part, as it is that you don’t get the part.” That nasty attitude dispels when poverty transmogrifies into prosperity…very few wealthy people mug you in an alleyway.<br />What is interesting to me (and proves my long-held belief that illustration is a much higher calling than we have led ourselves to believe) is how these discussions (minus the anonymous concussions and percussions) often lead into somewhat philosophical areas. So when you ask…” are you so convinced that it is an advancement for art to be removed from everyday life, from the functional craft of beautifully designed boxes and weapons and shoes and masks and totem objects with religious significance, and instead hung on a wall,” you’re bringing coal to Newcastle with me because, if nothing else, I am an applied artist. Virtually everything I have done for the past four decades has been fulfilling a commission. I have only recently become interested in gallery shows, but that’s just another marketing venue for me, not a burning desire to allow some inner genie out so that, finally, the world will understand me. I could care less.<br />If stranded on an island with no hope of ever seeing another human (not a disagreeable prospect for a misanthrope) I would immediately turn my effort toward decorating. That is, making everything beautiful to look at. However, I doubt that I’d paint pictures as I now do – as a form of communication. As it is, I have the advantage of being able to collect the work of fellow humans who excel in making beautifully designed boxes and weapons and shoes and masks and totem objects with religious significance. It’s important to me to have beautiful stuff around me.<br />My wife, Andrée, is frequently invited to speak at those big seminars for hopeful artists. At one, sponsored by HOW magazine, she spoke to the importance of the environment on the artist (I believe Pasteur’s dying word were something like le milieu c’est tout). If the artist worked in a studio with sprayed grafitti on the walls, rap blasting from the speakers and stains from The Special Sauce dotting his legible T-shirt, it is unlikely in the extreme that he will produce a serene Zen-like image. However, he is likely to produce a powerful poster for the next WrestleMania.<br /><br />The milieu sets the tone and the wise artist sets the milieu. There are cultural milieus that are antithetical to the production of elevated art. Producing art of any worth in the heart of scam-a-minute Lagos, Nigeria (…a wealthy relative had died and left 295 million American dollars for you…) is unlikely. And what else sets the creative milieu? Attitude. Much of this fashionable and jejune nihilism masquerades as irony and most of the practitioners wouldn’t know real irony if it bit them on the arse.<br />As you may have noticed, this reply starts out with the larger scope and narrows down, like a funnel, and here is where the velocity picks up. How can you possibly think that, while other cultures have prospered from western technology, the same cannot be said for western art. Have you ever been to a country where western (American) style legible T-shirts were not in abundance? I just saw pictures of some Willigamam-Wallalua bushmen wearing t-shirts with some helluva cute saying printed on them…in English. Okay, so that’s not high art, nor is advertising but one would have to be blind to America, and the West’s, most pervasive art form…movies. Those kids running the online scams in Lagos lined up to see the last Batman movie. Movies are an art form that saturates and envelops the audience. The effect of paintings…any paintings, is small beer compared to movies.<br />Coming in at a close second are western-produced TV commercials. Oh, did I fail to mention comic books as an art form and how that distinctly American form (sure, there was probably some Serbian who first produced sequential panels in a book, but so what). The American form spread and because of astounding western cartoonists (especially a whole school of Spanish and French artists…is there anyone like Jean Giraud [Moebius]) and you’ll find people tryingto read graphic novels from the swaying back of a camel.<br />The view into the fantasy of western life (all California women are blonde, have long legs and 2% body fat) is more powerful than any colonizing that’s gone before…and it’s done without having to set foot in the affected countries. So the art forms that we limit ourselves to…gallery and museum stuff, have little effect whereas the commercial stuff, the movies, TV ads and comic books are easily as powerful in forming an impression of western life as is the latest computer or air conditioner.<br />So stop thinking in terms of Science being the sine qua non of what we have to offer. We’re much more than technicians and inventors…we make art that pulls in millions a day at the box office. That’s real influence on a global scale.<br /><br />BTW Koons Rools!Rob Howardhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07587811799010051018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-13202230673549398092009-05-13T20:15:00.000-04:002009-05-13T20:15:00.000-04:00Can ugliness be conveyed beautifully?One word... G...<I>Can ugliness be conveyed beautifully?</I>One word... Goya.<br /><br />If you haven't seen Robert Hughes' "Goya: Crazy Like A Genius" yet, put it on your Netflix queue.Stephen Worthhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01047366337202801862noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-54405536989691440362009-05-13T19:00:00.000-04:002009-05-13T19:00:00.000-04:00Im not sure if ugliness can be portrayed beautiful...Im not sure if ugliness can be portrayed beautifully. I suspect it has more to do with our perception of what we are portraying. I think we can pick out what is beautiful in what is considered ugly, i.e the beauty in an old woman, though age is considered ugly, or the beauty in an old rusty warehouse , though decay is considered ugly. Though sometimes I think (worry?) this has more to do with abstract composition then it has to do with any integral beauty of the person/thing. When I look at an old tin and brick warehouse that is falling down, I often feel the same sense of peace and joy as looking at a beautiful landscape, and in fact there is some perverse side of me that prefers the decaying warehouse. Yet I wonder if this is because I see it with an artist's eye, and I am picking out the elements in it that would look nice in a drawing.<br /><br />When it comes to Grosz, he tended to bring out what was ugly in society, and then made it more ugly so that we would really notice it. There is the beauty of truth in it, and I love his work, but there is not a lot of it I can call beautiful (though i can certianly pick out elements of his line which is beautiful).<br /><br />I actuallly don't think there is a really simple answer.<br /><br />I think simplifying beauty down to set of universal golden means is as bad as the nationalistic simplification practised by the Nazis.<br /><br />Yet, when I look at a beautiful building like the Taj Mahal, I almost think that Rob is right, and that there at least is a universaly beautiful building.Matthew Adamshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06954050440829792514noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-32949884698974485982009-05-13T17:47:00.000-04:002009-05-13T17:47:00.000-04:00This comment has been removed by the author.António Araújohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10477716038667816702noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-45657936844955203562009-05-13T17:46:00.001-04:002009-05-13T17:46:00.001-04:00>Can ugliness be conveyed beautifully?
Certain...>Can ugliness be conveyed beautifully?<br /><br />Certainly. The other stuff I was talking about has no implications on that one way or another.António Araújohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10477716038667816702noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-61344722860986942032009-05-13T14:46:00.000-04:002009-05-13T14:46:00.000-04:00Rob, Omwo, Matthew and others-- The last element o...Rob, Omwo, Matthew and others-- The last element of this metaphysical gabfest that I would like to address is the discussion about ugliness and beauty in art. Those words can mean such widely divergent things, it's hard to agree or disagree, but as a general matter I think it's fair to say that "beauty" in art declined in value over the years because it came to be viewed as synthetic or even dishonest. Socialist realism created a lot of superficially beautiful pictures of healthy peasants working in nature, but they were just propaganda covering up a nightmarish reality. The Nazis generated a lot of beautiful pictures too, of aryan knights and furled banners. The people who saw the "ugly" side of life were the ones who were not so easily duped; George Grosz's pictures were filled with the corruption and putrefaction that he saw all around him. Eugene O'Neil's plays, such as "Long Day's Journey Into Night," displayed the truly ugly side of humanity, and he was anything but "unskilled." Can ugliness be conveyed beautifully?David Apatoffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11293486149879229016noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-42909270907237648052009-05-13T05:10:00.000-04:002009-05-13T05:10:00.000-04:00>I suspect it is in part because they >arriv...>I suspect it is in part because they >arrived as a package deal with western >technology.<br /><br />David, the japanese, for instance, are notorious at separating the parts of the package and taking what they want. Their national mindset would have no trouble separating the two and discarding the artistic part if it didn't appeal to them. In fact, there was a time when japan closed itself to the west and you couldn't have works of art from the west legally, and the likes of Hokusai risked themselves quite a bit to get their hands on the smuggled stuff.António Araújohttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10477716038667816702noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-56839180328726896902009-05-12T23:18:00.000-04:002009-05-12T23:18:00.000-04:00Hey I never said he didn't like big butts! I'll ju...Hey I never said he didn't like big butts! I'll just say that if you've ever seen pictures of his wife, she is the exact physical opposite of what he chooses to portray in his work. I was just trying to point out that artistic preference has a role here.Markhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08647357367202337917noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-12189014.post-67143918360215883682009-05-12T22:48:00.000-04:002009-05-12T22:48:00.000-04:00Mark: You have previously shown yourself to be an ...Mark: You have previously shown yourself to be an astute observer of the arts. Are you seriously telling me that you don't believe Frazetta has a healthy fixation with the female posterior??? If you look in the Fenner books and see Frazetta's personal paintings (including the one that looks suspiciously like a nude of Ellie on all fours with her bottom presented to the viewer) Frazetta could swear on a stack of bibles that he doesn't like bountiful rear ends on women and I would just laugh. Sir Mix-a-lot could learn something from Frazetta. (Not that there's anything wrong with that!)David Apatoffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11293486149879229016noreply@blogger.com