To "Heretic"...shouldn't it be "pour", rather than "pore" in your post?
To Kush, yes, poetry demands control and discipline, neither of which is displayed by George(s).
To everyone else, I guess I'm posting less in 2004.
To all the combatants......get a life!!
Andrew.
Suzanne Elrod
-
Andrew McGeever
- Posts: 905
- Joined: Sun Jul 07, 2002 10:02 pm
-
George.Wright
- Posts: 1874
- Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2002 3:37 pm
- Location: Bangor, N.Ireland
Kush, Heretic is a snide sniper, he is not a mortal enemy. I think he leads a sad life if all he can do is create negativity. At no time has Heretic tried to criticise my poetry, he skews it.
Heretic loves the attention created by his posts in whatever guises, the targets are boringly the same, with no justification. He thrives on conflict including blasphemy against "the master", just to get a knee jerk. He never posts anything creative or encouraging to other members. He is the BAD BOY of this Board.
My poetry is creative and follows no recognised parameters as you and Andrew rightly point out, but it has energy and imagry. Not all humans work in the same way or the world would be getting very boring. In the universe, there are no rules, only existance.
Georges
Heretic loves the attention created by his posts in whatever guises, the targets are boringly the same, with no justification. He thrives on conflict including blasphemy against "the master", just to get a knee jerk. He never posts anything creative or encouraging to other members. He is the BAD BOY of this Board.
My poetry is creative and follows no recognised parameters as you and Andrew rightly point out, but it has energy and imagry. Not all humans work in the same way or the world would be getting very boring. In the universe, there are no rules, only existance.
Georges
I am a right bad ass, dankish prince and I love my Violet to bits.
Shoot the messenger if you will George, but consider the message !!
".....let me say that I respect all opinions, except the one where people won't take the chance to have what might be a life-enriching experience because they are too set in their ways. To me, that's a cowardly way out."
- Placido Domingo
".....let me say that I respect all opinions, except the one where people won't take the chance to have what might be a life-enriching experience because they are too set in their ways. To me, that's a cowardly way out."
- Placido Domingo
-
George.Wright
- Posts: 1874
- Joined: Mon Jul 08, 2002 3:37 pm
- Location: Bangor, N.Ireland
Hi Lizzy~
Thanks for acknowledging that I wasn't claiming to be an "expert" in art. I only shared my understanding of the effects and affects because of having 'done it' (or, more accurately, 'tried it'). It is not an easy thing, either! You're right, Coco, her self-portrait isn't too bad at all. And, as I mentioned, the little girl's profile portrait is quite lovely. It was the three men (in particular), so obviously from photos, that prompted my comments.
Liz, I liked your new 'slant' on the LC line about "someone who outdrew you". Yeah, I think she did/does!
Andrew McG.~ No doubt 'orthodox' art experts/critics of the time referred to Picasso as lacking "control and discipline". I use Picasso as an analogy because I didn't like a lot of his stuff; many did. If we never break-out of what the prevailing dogma says is 'acceptable' - where would innovation and new art-forms come from?
Anyone care to explain Jackson Pollock's appeal? The Australian government sure pissed off a lot of people, back in the 70s, when they purchased a huge Pollock painting for the new parliament building - it cost $millions! Andrew (Darby), help me out here, can you remember how much they/we paid for that thing?
~ Makera
Thanks for acknowledging that I wasn't claiming to be an "expert" in art. I only shared my understanding of the effects and affects because of having 'done it' (or, more accurately, 'tried it'). It is not an easy thing, either! You're right, Coco, her self-portrait isn't too bad at all. And, as I mentioned, the little girl's profile portrait is quite lovely. It was the three men (in particular), so obviously from photos, that prompted my comments.
Liz, I liked your new 'slant' on the LC line about "someone who outdrew you". Yeah, I think she did/does!
Andrew McG.~ No doubt 'orthodox' art experts/critics of the time referred to Picasso as lacking "control and discipline". I use Picasso as an analogy because I didn't like a lot of his stuff; many did. If we never break-out of what the prevailing dogma says is 'acceptable' - where would innovation and new art-forms come from?
Anyone care to explain Jackson Pollock's appeal? The Australian government sure pissed off a lot of people, back in the 70s, when they purchased a huge Pollock painting for the new parliament building - it cost $millions! Andrew (Darby), help me out here, can you remember how much they/we paid for that thing?
~ Makera
Well, the evidence mounts, Makera ....also in the film "ladies and Gentlemen...Mr. Leonard Cohen," the narrator comments that Leonard spent three years at McGill University as an average, art student and one inglorious semester in law. Love that word....."inglorious."
Nothing to do with the above, but also in the film with his reading of the poem, which may/may not be titled "For You," but since that's the oft-repeated phrase, likely is.....the very similar theme of "I'm Your Man" emerged, so that song may well be one of those that he's worked on for years, or has simply been 'in there' for a very long time.
~ Lizzy
....also in the film "ladies and Gentlemen...Mr. Leonard Cohen," the narrator comments that Leonard spent three years at McGill University as an average, art student and one inglorious semester in law. Love that word....."inglorious."Nothing to do with the above, but also in the film with his reading of the poem, which may/may not be titled "For You," but since that's the oft-repeated phrase, likely is.....the very similar theme of "I'm Your Man" emerged, so that song may well be one of those that he's worked on for years, or has simply been 'in there' for a very long time.
~ Lizzy
just want to jump into the bloody mess.
like was mentioned earlier,there is the undeniable structure and protocal and procedure to all things under the sun.man has this way of calculation and limitading which i call the math of things.now each person has their own appreciation of each thing,which (usualy) is effected by popular opinion.like it or not thats how it is.so when the establishment decides your work is exceptable,regardless of its "true" value it becomes valueble.capitalism.art of yore with its realism reflected the nature of the "general" society of those days,being more traditional.to value a piece by its quality,a close exploration of the techniques used and so on needs to be made,by those "experts".any other value is purely relative.instead of becoming a more freer place for imagination these days it seems the trend is to revert to the system.if someone brings art into a gallery,for example,the first question is,"what school did you go to".i'm told it was not that way not too long ago.so its quite contrary with the "junky" art becoming popular through the riggid regime.it has sense to it."talent" can be raw or harnessed.take a young wild foal and you can turn it into a workhorse or let it grow to be the magnifacent stallion (or mare) it has potential for.the workhorse gets three meals a day and a blanket at night as long as it keeps its masters happy.the stallion rarely is seen nowadays.well enough of the blah blah...i wonder if i have written anything that will suffice to come under the "passionate blade" of heretic...
salut ,
elazar
like was mentioned earlier,there is the undeniable structure and protocal and procedure to all things under the sun.man has this way of calculation and limitading which i call the math of things.now each person has their own appreciation of each thing,which (usualy) is effected by popular opinion.like it or not thats how it is.so when the establishment decides your work is exceptable,regardless of its "true" value it becomes valueble.capitalism.art of yore with its realism reflected the nature of the "general" society of those days,being more traditional.to value a piece by its quality,a close exploration of the techniques used and so on needs to be made,by those "experts".any other value is purely relative.instead of becoming a more freer place for imagination these days it seems the trend is to revert to the system.if someone brings art into a gallery,for example,the first question is,"what school did you go to".i'm told it was not that way not too long ago.so its quite contrary with the "junky" art becoming popular through the riggid regime.it has sense to it."talent" can be raw or harnessed.take a young wild foal and you can turn it into a workhorse or let it grow to be the magnifacent stallion (or mare) it has potential for.the workhorse gets three meals a day and a blanket at night as long as it keeps its masters happy.the stallion rarely is seen nowadays.well enough of the blah blah...i wonder if i have written anything that will suffice to come under the "passionate blade" of heretic...
salut ,
elazar
breathe deep and live
. Especially your analogy of horses; i.e. true freedom to explore one's full, expressive potential - or constrained in the role of a 'hack'! 
Most horses are hacks. So are most people. There's nothing wrong with that. I'm a hack. I hack away at my life the best I can. It's when the hacks start thinking their macrame plant hangers are art that the trouble begins. Ninety per cent of the people who insist they are artists can't understand why no one else (other than their fellow "artists") will recognize their talent. It's just Sturgeon's Law.
The copyright office of the Library of Congress of the U.S. Government recognizes the following as Works of the Visual Arts:
<http//www.copyright.gov/circs/circ40.html#works>
Perhaps this will broaden your perspective Moonlight , and help you to realize the myriad forms human expression takes.
<http//www.copyright.gov/circs/circ40.html#works>
Perhaps this will broaden your perspective Moonlight , and help you to realize the myriad forms human expression takes.
Moonlight~
I'm presuming you are not including any forum members as inclusive in your reference to those "who insist they are artists". No one here has made such claims as far as I'm aware.
However, your reference to "Sturgeon's Law" is interesting. Given that it was a reactionary comeback (by the science fiction author Theodore Sturgeon) to harsh criticism of all SF by those citing the worst examples. He said, "Sure 90% of science fiction is crud. That's because 90% of everything is crud."
That seems to me to be just a variation-on-a-theme-of the Bell Curve graph principle. The 'bulge' of the Bell Curve being 90% of the population - with a mental age of about 12 (to be generous). We are talking about the upper (narrow) end of 10-5%.
Regarding the Sturgeon statement, I like the following quote from Bo Leuf:
"By itself, the quote is not much more than a glib remark. But.... There is a sort of converse to 'Sturgeon's Law' in that it has been said that when 10% or more of a given population reach enlightenment, society as a whole will dramatically improve. Perhaps this can be extended to mean that when at least 10% of any given (whatever) has high quality, then the (whatever) as such becomes interesting. Sort of a rule-of-thumb minimum signal-to-noise ratio to information..? Applicable to code/design/patterns/methodology/ ?"
Then again, we can never underestimate the power of 'one' to move (whatever), can we.
~Makera
I'm presuming you are not including any forum members as inclusive in your reference to those "who insist they are artists". No one here has made such claims as far as I'm aware.
However, your reference to "Sturgeon's Law" is interesting. Given that it was a reactionary comeback (by the science fiction author Theodore Sturgeon) to harsh criticism of all SF by those citing the worst examples. He said, "Sure 90% of science fiction is crud. That's because 90% of everything is crud."
That seems to me to be just a variation-on-a-theme-of the Bell Curve graph principle. The 'bulge' of the Bell Curve being 90% of the population - with a mental age of about 12 (to be generous). We are talking about the upper (narrow) end of 10-5%.
Regarding the Sturgeon statement, I like the following quote from Bo Leuf:
"By itself, the quote is not much more than a glib remark. But.... There is a sort of converse to 'Sturgeon's Law' in that it has been said that when 10% or more of a given population reach enlightenment, society as a whole will dramatically improve. Perhaps this can be extended to mean that when at least 10% of any given (whatever) has high quality, then the (whatever) as such becomes interesting. Sort of a rule-of-thumb minimum signal-to-noise ratio to information..? Applicable to code/design/patterns/methodology/ ?"
Then again, we can never underestimate the power of 'one' to move (whatever), can we.
~Makera
Lightning,
Getting a copyright from the U.S. Government is hardly a pronouncement that one's work is "art". It just means you got a copyright. Besides I thought most of the people on this board were against the U.S. Government making a pronouncement on anything. It seems you've really broadened your own views.
Getting a copyright from the U.S. Government is hardly a pronouncement that one's work is "art". It just means you got a copyright. Besides I thought most of the people on this board were against the U.S. Government making a pronouncement on anything. It seems you've really broadened your own views.