|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Are artists superior? |
| Ofcourse |
|
78% |
[ 11 ] |
| No, but Im not very cultured. |
|
21% |
[ 3 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 14 |
|
| Author |
Message |
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
 Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 3:55 pm Post subject: Re: Are artists superior? |
 |
|
| Free World wrote: |
| jinju wrote: |
Over the ages, it is the artists we remember. ...
From painting and sculture, to photography, to literature and music, are artists superior to others? |
I remember famous painters and sculptors and authors and musicians but I can't think of any famous photographers who will be remembered next century... Are photographers inferior to real artists? |
Ansel Adams. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
mindmetoo
Joined: 02 Feb 2004
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 4:14 pm Post subject: Re: Are artists superior? |
|
|
| Free World wrote: |
| jinju wrote: |
Over the ages, it is the artists we remember. ...
From painting and sculture, to photography, to literature and music, are artists superior to others? |
I remember famous painters and sculptors and authors and musicians but I can't think of any famous photographers who will be remembered next century... Are photographers inferior to real artists? |
Excellent point. Seriously, anyone can point their digital camera these days, snap 100 photos on auto, and get one great photo. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kimchi story
Joined: 23 Nov 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 4:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Photography is still in its infancy (in terms of the canon, not in terms of technology), but it has contributed some great stuff:
Ansel Adams, Andy Goldsworthy, Man Ray, the intrepid Edward Curtis, Annie Leibowitz...I'm sure you've heard of all, except maybe one, of those. I'm not saying that means you must LIKE them, just that you can't really say that photography is an insignificant art form. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jinju
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 6:11 pm Post subject: Re: Are artists superior? |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| Free World wrote: |
| jinju wrote: |
Over the ages, it is the artists we remember. ...
From painting and sculture, to photography, to literature and music, are artists superior to others? |
I remember famous painters and sculptors and authors and musicians but I can't think of any famous photographers who will be remembered next century... Are photographers inferior to real artists? |
Excellent point. Seriously, anyone can point their digital camera these days, snap 100 photos on auto, and get one great photo. |
Thats bollocks. Unlike other artforms a photographer isnt defined by a single shot but by his body of work. Yes, people can luck out and get one good shot. Good for them, however we dont usually consider such people when we talk about great photographers. If you are going to make a fool of yourself, perhaps you should keep out of serious threads.
Somene getting 1 good photo out of 100 snaps isnt exactly going to be considered a great photographer. Would one good poem suddenly put you up there in the pantheon of great poets? I really see you are coming at this with a serious lack of knowledge and a bad attitude, and unlike kimchi story I will not point you to any resources because I ca see it will fall on deaf ears, or rather blind eyes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kimchi story
Joined: 23 Nov 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 6:17 pm Post subject: Re: Are artists superior? |
|
|
| jinju wrote: |
| perhaps you should keep out of serious threads. |
W-w-w-wait a minute - if I knew this was a serious thread I wouldn't have said the intrepid Edward Curtis - I would have said the dastardly Edward Curtis... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Free World
Joined: 01 Apr 2005
Location: Drake Hotel
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 6:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Man Ray, Ansel Adams, Andy Goldsworthy, Annie Leibowitz, etc. They may be admired by photography fans today but will they be remembered in the 2200s?
When people in the twenty-first century witness a da Vinci painting or a Michelangelo sculpture, or a Shakespeare play, or a Mozart composition, they are not only rendered speechless by the art, but they know who the artist is. These men died in the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries but are household names today.
I doubt my descendants will look at a landscape snapshot by Adams or someone�s portrait by Leibowitz with quite the same admiration. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jinju
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 7:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Free World wrote: |
Man Ray, Ansel Adams, Andy Goldsworthy, Annie Leibowitz, etc. They may be admired by photography fans today but will they be remembered in the 2200s?
When people in the twenty-first century witness a da Vinci painting or a Michelangelo sculpture, or a Shakespeare play, or a Mozart composition, they are not only rendered speechless by the art, but they know who the artist is. These men died in the sixteenth, seventeenth, and eighteenth centuries but are household names today.
I doubt my descendants will look at a landscape snapshot by Adams or someone�s portrait by Leibowitz with quite the same admiration. |
Leibowitz - Im not a fan. Ansel Adams, Im not fan of landscapes. However take someone like Henri cartier Bresson, there is no doubt he will be admired in 100 years or 1000. Because while Leibowitz and Adams are admired for their technical prowess, Cartier Bresson is admired for the substance of the photograph. The Decisive moment, while not his creation, is a concept he put into the lexicon, and its pretty much he basis of a great shot. When we talk about people like Leibowitz or Adams we can liken them to the many skilled crafstmen coming out of the Reneissance or the Dutch school, very gifted technically but overshadowed, forgotten over time. When we talk about the HCB's of the world we talk about Raphaels, people who put something more into a painting, or in this case a photo. Other people who will be remembered for as long as photography is around are guys like Salgado or Capa. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kimchi story
Joined: 23 Nov 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 7:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ok so flash back to prehistory Europe, a dark cave...
Zog: WTF are you doing Grof, you moron! You're spitting paint all over your hand? Freak.
Grof: Shaddup weenie - you're the freak, all cooking your meat and sh!t. I'm tired of painting the same buffalo over and over.
25 000 years later, every 1st year Art History survey text begins with a discussion of Grof's hand in the Alta Mira caves.
My point is that if there is a weakness in photography it's not that anyone can do it, it's that it lacks a certain presence. When I look at The Sunrise on the Sanguenay I'm not moved because it is awesome and sublime - its not very big at all. But that I can see the artist's brushstrokes, and can sense his presence in a very real way - to me that is part of what makes the more traditional arts timeless. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jinju
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 8:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kimchi story wrote: |
| My point is that if there is a weakness in photography it's not that anyone can do it, |
Anyone can paint. Anyone can sculpt. Anyone can write poetry. Anyone can write a novel. Anyone can write a song or even a symphony. Anyone can do any art you can think of, but only a small group of select few can do any of those well.
| Quote: |
| it's that it lacks a certain presence. When I look at The Sunrise on the Sanguenay I'm not moved because it is awesome and sublime - its not very big at all. But that I can see the artist's brushstrokes, and can sense his presence in a very real way - to me that is part of what makes the more traditional arts timeless |
What about a Shakespearean play?
An Andy Worhol print?
A Chopin Polonaise?
None of those will show you a)Shakespeare's handwiting as he put down those sonnets on paper, b) Worhol's brush strokes, c) Notes written down by Chopin. In the case of music, be it Chopin, Mozart, Tchaikovsky you wont even get to hear them actually play as he recordings are performed by others. So how does your example apply to them? Are they not art? But even in the case of paintings, how sure can you be that the brushstrokes you are seeing are actually of the guy who claims credit for the work? You do realize many painters had tas of assistants who did much of the mundane painting and you really cant be sure of Da Vinci for example put down each and evryone of those strokes by himself.
The reason I like photography is its immediacy. Something paintings can't approximate. When I see Salgado's work http://www.terra.com.br/sebastiaosalgado/ (individual photos but more so the photo stories) I am connected to the subjects - I am seeing their misery, pain, dreams, existance as it is. There is an immediacy, a truer connection to what I am being shown. Landscapes have never grabbed me because they are shallow. They say nothing. They are like the pretty blonde, pretty but vacuous without anything to say. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
kimchi story
Joined: 23 Nov 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 8:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jinju wrote: |
| So how does your example apply to them? Are they not art? |
It took me a double major in Literature and Art History to come to my own terms with that one. I'll let you come to your own.
De gustibus non est desputandem - so I think I'll bow out here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jinju
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 9:13 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| kimchi story wrote: |
| jinju wrote: |
| So how does your example apply to them? Are they not art? |
It took me a double major in Literature and Art History to come to my own terms with that one. I'll let you come to your own.
De gustibus non est desputandem - so I think I'll bow out here. |
Very well, bow out. The thread has been derailed as it wasnt meant to be a debate between different forms of art, but rather art vs non art. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laogaiguk
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: somewhere in Korea
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 9:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jinju wrote: |
| kimchi story wrote: |
| jinju wrote: |
| So how does your example apply to them? Are they not art? |
It took me a double major in Literature and Art History to come to my own terms with that one. I'll let you come to your own.
De gustibus non est desputandem - so I think I'll bow out here. |
Very well, bow out. The thread has been derailed as it wasnt meant to be a debate between different forms of art, but rather art vs non art. |
I don't mean this in an arrogant way though it will sound like that, but I had thought everyone had agreed that your original OP was somewhat flawed, there being lots of people we remember from all walks of life, not just art. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jinju
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 9:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| laogaiguk wrote: |
| jinju wrote: |
| kimchi story wrote: |
| jinju wrote: |
| So how does your example apply to them? Are they not art? |
It took me a double major in Literature and Art History to come to my own terms with that one. I'll let you come to your own.
De gustibus non est desputandem - so I think I'll bow out here. |
Very well, bow out. The thread has been derailed as it wasnt meant to be a debate between different forms of art, but rather art vs non art. |
I don't mean this in an arrogant way though it will sound like that, but I had thought everyone had agreed that your original OP was somewhat flawed, there being lots of people we remember from all walks of life, not just art. |
It doesnt make my argument flawed as I never said we ONLY remember artists and scientists. What I said was that these two groups have had the largest impact on culture and civilization and that we remember more people from these 2 groups than from others. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
laogaiguk
Joined: 06 Dec 2005
Location: somewhere in Korea
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 9:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| jinju wrote: |
It doesnt make my argument flawed as I never said we ONLY remember artists and scientists. What I said was that these two groups have had the largest impact on culture and civilization and that we remember more people from these 2 groups than from others. |
That was taken out too though. What about generals and leaders (and others)?
Not to mention Jesus and Mohammed and others  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jinju
Joined: 22 Jan 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Apr 09, 2007 9:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| laogaiguk wrote: |
| jinju wrote: |
It doesnt make my argument flawed as I never said we ONLY remember artists and scientists. What I said was that these two groups have had the largest impact on culture and civilization and that we remember more people from these 2 groups than from others. |
That was taken out too though. What about generals and leaders (and others)? |
That has been addressed. Read the thread. |
|
| 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
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
