Korean Job Discussion Forums :: View topic - The Great Korean Author__

Speak Korean Now!

Teach English Abroad and Get Paid to see the World!

Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"

FAQ

Memberlist

Usergroups

Profile

The Great Korean Author___.
Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next

Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> General Discussion Forum

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

the_beaver

Joined: 15 Jan 2003

Posted: Thu Feb 12, 2004 6:33 pm Post subject:

katydid wrote:

My brother has a rug painting of dogs playing poker.

The rug is tacky, but the prints of dogs playing pool and dogs playing poker are classic.

Jensen

Joined: 30 Mar 2003
Location: hippie hell

Posted: Thu Feb 12, 2004 6:34 pm Post subject:

matko wrote:

indiercj wrote:

matko wrote:

I don't understand your answer.

Are Korean authors only popular in Korean or do they have a following in other Asian countries?

I'm assuming that they would be translated if that's what you're getting at. Confused

Of course they are only popular in Korean. I doubt there are enough people from other Asian countries speaking Korean fluently enough to translate them. Maybe judging from recent trend in watching Korean films and TV dramas and the fact that more people are learning Korean could lead them to be interested in Korean literature. Who knows?

I should have wrote 'popular in Korea' and not Korean.

All it takes is one person to translate a copy into, for example, Japanese.

I am sure many Korean books have been translated into other languages, no?

Do they have a following abroad? I think most countries can claim to have authors who are popular in other countries that do not share the same language. I am curious who those Korean authors are and in what countries are they popular?

That's an interesting question.
There are probably many Japanese translations of the standard Korean "masterpieces". I wonder if there are a lot of fans of Korean lit in Japan and what particular Korean writers might have made their way into mainstream familiarity there? There are Russian, French, and German scholars who, like English-speaking Korean studies scholars, translate Korean literature into their native languages. But scholars tend to focus on what has already become accepted as Litererature (capital "L")...Korea's lit 101 is gradually getting completed in the US and it's a good resource but not the sort of thing that inspires mad devotion of the sort that contemporary Japanese authors are starting to receive worldwide. I see a lot more interest in Korean films here in the US than in Korean writings, small town video stores in the PNW are stocking Chun Hyang, Shiri, etc.

I got to interpret for a Hmong family at the Korean video store in Portland the other day. They didn't speak Korean but they apparently love Korean historical stuff..."funny hats and sword fighting."

Jensen

Joined: 30 Mar 2003
Location: hippie hell

Posted: Thu Feb 12, 2004 6:41 pm Post subject:

Ody wrote:

I didn't know Jackson Pollock wrote books! He's a good painter though.

Damn straight.

Corporal

Joined: 25 Jan 2003

Posted: Thu Feb 12, 2004 7:05 pm Post subject:

Ody wrote:

Corporal wrote:

Define great.

I don't think Jackson Pollock is so great. But many people have heard of him. In fact, he's downright famous.

But he isn't so great.

In fact, he sucks.

HTH

I didn't know Jackson Pollock wrote books! He's a good painter though.

Of course he's a painter. Who said he wrote books? I didn't know he wrote books either. We were talking about art in general, weren't we?

Ody

Joined: 27 Jan 2003
Location: over here

Posted: Thu Feb 12, 2004 7:48 pm Post subject:

Corporal wrote:

...We were talking about art in general, weren't we?

thread title: "The Great Korean Author ________"

Ody

Joined: 27 Jan 2003
Location: over here

Posted: Thu Feb 12, 2004 8:01 pm Post subject:

katydid wrote:

I don't know. A lot of people complain about modern art and say they can do that, why is this artist so famous and making money and I'm not? I've always kind of wondered when I did see say a painting of a green square on a yellow background if the artist is somehow communicating to his audience that those who create art don't have to be well-trained, well schooled, or even well-skilled. They just went out and painted. Maybe the end result looks like "nothing" but I think Pollock's method of painting was really interesting, if not revolutionary. He was well-schooled and probably could have done Monet knock-offs for the rest of his life but chose not to.
Think about a big white canvas in front of you and having all this paint and throwing it around and seeing what happens, what's created in the moment. You could say that maybe the finished product on its own looks nothing like art to you, but certainly, the time and method spent on creating what gets hung on the wall is art itself. I remember in an art class I took in high school, we were given the chance to create our own Pollock-style painting and while OK, I don't remember what I painted, I do remember having a hell of a lot of fun with it.
So I think if you look at his art as saying "anyone can do this," technically, that *is* a good thing, isn't it?

This is all pretty well said. Thanks, Katydid, for your thoughtful input.

My own take on the wet paintings by Pollack or Rothko�s block paintings, is that they are an essential part of the evolution of painting. And, not to detract from the relevance of their talent or the importance of their contribution, that Pollack's and Rothko's (and other's) success had a little something to do with good timing.

Ody

Joined: 27 Jan 2003
Location: over here

Posted: Thu Feb 12, 2004 8:10 pm Post subject:

tokki wrote:

...Im gonna laugh at you though, and your ilk.

You're breaking my heart.

So Tokki, Are you Frankenstein or Phyllis?

Corporal

Joined: 25 Jan 2003

Posted: Thu Feb 12, 2004 9:40 pm Post subject:

Ody wrote:

My own take on the wet paintings by Pollack or Rothko’s block paintings, is that they are an essential part of the evolution of painting. And, not to detract from the relevance of their talent or the importance of their contribution, that Pollack's and Rothko's (and other's) success had a little something to do with good timing.

That's exactly what I would have expected you to say. And I could have written the exact same paragraph if I wanted to bother, except that I don't believe it. It's not that hard to bulls.h.i.t. having had some or plenty of art appreciation, especially if you were raised on truly great art (a category to which J.P's work does not belong) as I was.

Ody

Joined: 27 Jan 2003
Location: over here

Posted: Thu Feb 12, 2004 10:27 pm Post subject:

Corporal wrote:

Ody wrote:

Excuse me if I say so but, unless you are the acception, your art appreciation instructors failed in their jobs.

I took my first university life study class when I was 12 where, in addition to drawing from nude models, still lives etc., we studied the masters. It was compulsory that we learn to draw in all their styles. This gave me a foundation that is not unlike that studied by students of art through the ages.

As for your guessing correctly, what I would say on this or any subject, it's a nice try but we belong to leagues that are miles apart. I for one respect our differences enough to recognize that, if I remain open to the possibility, I can learn something from you.

Maybe you're done learning?

Corporal

Joined: 25 Jan 2003

Posted: Thu Feb 12, 2004 10:31 pm Post subject:

Ody wrote:

Maybe you're done learning?

Only if those who would teach me are blemished by their own pretensions, pedantic grandstandings, and pseudo-intellectual supremism.

Ody

Joined: 27 Jan 2003
Location: over here

Posted: Thu Feb 12, 2004 11:40 pm Post subject:

A canned response. Let�s call it Corporal in a Can! We can market it to all those less clever participants who need to �one-up� their peers on a message board.

Corporal wrote:

Ody wrote:

Maybe you're done learning?

Only if those who would teach me are blemished by their own pretensions, pedantic grandstandings, and pseudo-intellectual supremism.

I know I have participated on the I.Q. thread, but I don�t recall ever presenting myself as an intellectual. In fact, I make a practice of avoiding such pretension for the simple reason that trying to appear to be something or other does not serve my honest interest in expanding my understanding. That said, I am quite confident that on the subject of art, specifically painting, I am better informed than you will ever be.

You have said on other threads that you appreciate a gentleman. I took this to mean that you hold cordiality in high regard. If this were so, than you and I would actually share common ground, but that�s not looking to be the case.

So, fire away.
Cool

edit: um, not out yet.

Last edited by Ody on Fri Feb 13, 2004 2:13 am; edited 1 time in total

Corporal

Joined: 25 Jan 2003

Posted: Fri Feb 13, 2004 12:10 am Post subject:

Ody wrote:

That said, I am quite confident that on the subject of art, specifically painting, I am better informed than you will ever be.

But but...you have to stick around long enough so I can tell you at what age I started art appreciation class! Oh, and did I mention I was reading at age 3? So I think I can be reasonably confident that I know more about books than you ever will.

Duh.

Rolling Eyes

Ody

Joined: 27 Jan 2003
Location: over here

Posted: Fri Feb 13, 2004 2:12 am Post subject:

Corporal wrote:

Ody wrote:

That said, I am quite confident that on the subject of art, specifically painting, I am better informed than you will ever be.

i simply cannot resist.

you have brought this dialog full around to where it started when i commented that the example of an artist was used on a thread about authors. what i didn't say, but implied, was that it came from one whom i know to be knowledgeable not about art, but about books (authors). yes corporal, i give you every credit for being more knowledgeable than i on the subject of literature and probably a great many other things; just not everything. i hope you can live with that.

kiwiboy_nz_99

Joined: 05 Jul 2003
Location: ...Enlightenment...

Posted: Fri Feb 13, 2004 2:46 am Post subject:

Quote:

Your so called collector is non too smart ay?

My so called art collector is entirely fictional, but you get the point!

Quote:

BTW, you once commented that mine was "a damn good painting." I'm going out on a limb here but, do you suppose i might actually KNOW what i'm talking about?

I wouldn't link ability in art with the authority to say what is good art. A couple of my favourite New Zealand artists also loathe Pollock and his ilk.

Quote:

hey Tokki, I just picked up a lovely painting of some dogs playing pool. you'd love it.

That painting is mega-cool. I'd have that on my wall before a Pollock original any day.

Ody

Joined: 27 Jan 2003
Location: over here

Posted: Fri Feb 13, 2004 3:36 am Post subject:

kiwiboy_nz_99 wrote:

My so called art collector is entirely fictional, but you get the point!

See, you couldn't fool me!

kiwiboy_nz_99 wrote:

I wouldn't link ability in art with the authority to say what is good art.

I've said it to you before, I try to avoid words like "good" and "bad" because I don't think value is absolute. You may think Pollack isn't a good artist, fine. I may or may not agree with you, that's not the point. He's still, bar nun, a great painter. Besides, I wouldn't criticize someone's positive assessment of any work of art; or for that matter, novel, movie, music, whatever. I tend to respect another's appreciation for a thing and often try to get why. But, when a base criticism, so obviously ill informed, is pulled out of nowhere and is (as in this case) interjected out of context with the subject at hand (and thus so forced), my response is motivated.

kiwiboy_nz_99 wrote:

A couple of my favourite New Zealand artists also loathe Pollock and his ilk.

That may be. However, in my experience, (save for Carlos, a 15 year old fellow in my gifted class back in 1981) I haven't met a painter who wouldn't at least acknowledge Pollack's contribution to painting. If a collector, a patron of the arts, or even a fellow artist disregards the New York School of Abstract Expressionists, fine, everyone has their own taste. I guess I can respect that. But it is indeed rare for a painter to do the same.

kiwiboy_nz_99 wrote:

That painting is mega-cool. I'd have that on my wall before a Pollock original any day.

Like I said, to each his own.

Just curious, can you really see spending your disposable income on an original painting? If yes, what would it be? Can you find a picture of something you love?

Display posts from previous:

	Korean Job Discussion Forums Forum Index -> General Discussion Forum	All times are GMT - 8 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 Next
Page 4 of 5

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

TEFL International Supports Dave's ESL Cafe