next »

[pyshnov]

Excellent article. The answers (Why I Prefer to Remain Anonymous) are infantile as everything issued from The Marihuana Generation. When I read the answers, I thought, yes, these are sort of reasonable answers. But one needs to read Peter Plagens to see the signs that point to what, I say, is infantilism. Remember going into a fetus position? Did any psychologist pay attention? If not, what the psychologists are doing anyway? Did anyone ever describe the Marihuana Generation complex?

[mountain_ivy]

link please.

[pyshnov]

Peter Plagens - http://chronicle.com/jobs/news/2008/03/2008033101c/careers.html

[gastr1]

http://www.nancyhoffmangallery.com/plag/view.html

Hey, pyshnov--
What do you think of Plagens' paintings? He's an artist, you know. Can he touch Cezanne, or is he a trash merchant too?

have a lovely day,
Gastr1

[thenewyorker]

http://www.nancyhoffmangallery.com/plag/view.html

Hey, pyshnov--
What do you think of Plagens' paintings? He's an artist, you know. Can he touch Cezanne, or is he a trash merchant too?

have a lovely day,
Gastr1

hee hee

(And when exactly was (is?) the mariJuana generation?)

[pyshnov]

Some people can never get comfortable with facts. If they reject somebody's paintings, he must also be a "sexist". If they like an idea, they will say that its author has beautiful legs, even if he is lame.

Plagens' paintings are decorative craft, not art. Some might like it and call it decorative art. The trouble is that when he says it's art and when he gives them titles and when there are "explanations" about what exactly makes them art - that's fraud.

Decorative art can be an art of the highest and unsurpassed quality, such is the tiles of old Mosques (a broken piece of tile of the period can fetch thirty thousand dollars at an auction, which explains what the bloody savages did in Iraq). Some tiles have an imitation of Arabic inscriptions that cannot be read, proving - it's just an ornament and the real inscriptions is the same.

There is no doubt that abstract art can reach that level of quality. But, it never does, because it will at once loose its claim of being an innovation. The ways to keep it an innovation are: a) reducing the number of repeating elements, b) increasing the number of repeating chaos, c) anything that strikes one as ugly.

What we perceive as beautiful must remain withing rather sharp borders; there cannot be a subjectivity here because our brain is made this way and not the other way. Everything else, attempts at "pushing the borders", etc. is fraud. In music it's all proven mathematically; what is harmony and what is cacophony is well known. But painting remains an area where idiocy still reigns. Well, it doesn't mean that you never hear tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta.

[gastr1]

Some people can never get comfortable with facts. If they reject somebody's paintings, he must also be a "sexist". If they like an idea, they will say that its author has beautiful legs, even if he is lame.

Plagens' paintings are decorative craft, not art. Some might like it and call it decorative art. The trouble is that when he says it's art and when he gives them titles and when there are "explanations" about what exactly makes them art - that's fraud.

Decorative art can be an art of the highest and unsurpassed quality, such is the tiles of old Mosques (a broken piece of tile of the period can fetch thirty thousand dollars at an auction, which explains what the bloody savages did in Iraq). Some tiles have an imitation of Arabic inscriptions that cannot be read, proving - it's just an ornament and the real inscriptions is the same.

There is no doubt that abstract art can reach that level of quality. But, it never does, because it will at once loose its claim of being an innovation. The ways to keep it an innovation are: a) reducing the number of repeating elements, b) increasing the number of repeating chaos, c) anything that strikes one as ugly.

What we perceive as beautiful must remain withing rather sharp borders; there cannot be a subjectivity here because our brain is made this way and not the other way. Everything else, attempts at "pushing the borders", etc. is fraud. In music it's all proven mathematically; what is harmony and what is cacophony is well known. But painting remains an area where idiocy still reigns. Well, it doesn't mean that you never hear tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta, tata-ta.

Good to know, especially that last dissertation on painting, idiocy, and tata-tas. I'll be sure to pass that on to my students. Plagens, too--since you are against anonymity, why not email him?

Pyshnov, when is your book on art criticism coming out? I think there's a career there for you--"moneys to be made."

[d_w_s]

Okay, I'll bite on this one.

pyshknov, your statements are your opinions, not facts.

My opinions:
--A piece of ceramic fetching a high sum at auction does not guarantee a specific level of quality.
-- Since when is innovation the key to making good art?
-- Our brains aren't "made" in any other way than what society has wired.  The "hardware" of our brains is affected by the "software" of culture and conditioning. In this case, beauty is subjective an not an absolute. I find Anselm Kiefer's paintings beautiful, though he functions content-wise in abjection and desolation.

Osip Brik, Russian Futurist, once stated, "The calico-print is just the same sort of product of art culture as the picture, and there is no
foundation for drawing any sort of dividing line between the two."

Byte me.

[pyshnov]

maggie_simpson:

pyshknov, your statements are your opinions, not facts.

The name is wrong, the rest is OK.

--A piece of ceramic fetching a high sum at auction does not guarantee a specific level of quality.

These are of unsurpassed quality, independently of your generalisation which is out of place here.

-- Since when is innovation the key to making good art?

I never said this, I say the claim of being an innovation is the only "value" of degenerate art.

-- Our brains aren't "made" in any other way than what society has wired. 

Wrong.

The "hardware" of our brains is affected by the "software" of culture and conditioning. In this case, beauty is subjective an not an absolute.

It is affected. But, there is an absolute component. Culture operates within the borders of this component; the borders can be pushed but slightly. At some point the brainwashing becomes powerless. It has to be a torture to make bigger changes.

I find Anselm Kiefer's paintings beautiful, though he functions content-wise in abjection and desolation.

Never saw Anselm. But, if you say the word "beautiful', give link to pictures, please. In return, I might give my critique.

Osip Brik, Russian Futurist, once stated, "The calico-print is just the same sort of product of art culture as the picture, and there is no
foundation for drawing any sort of dividing line between the two."

He inadvertently and intuitively and in following the party line drew the dividing line by saying "art culture" instead of "art", and said "sort of product". Osip was the brother of Lila, passion of Mayakovsky. There was a lot of passions these days, some of which were pretty stupid, and so were their judgements, pictures, etc. Revolution doesn't inspire good art, it bites everything it feels is on its way. Culture, definitely and always is on its way.

[gastr1]

Okay, I'll bite on this one.

pyshknov, your statements are your opinions, not facts.

Welcome to the jungle, maggie. Check out pyshnov's intriguing statements on the "yale student's 'art'" thread. thenewyorker and I have resigned ourselves to seeing the humor in his posts more than anything else.

[pyshnov]

maggie_simpson, you gave me a good tip for the maxim: "Every hardware has limitations on the software it can handle and handle correctly. There is, therefore, a software in a hardware". Sounds trivial, but it is not. The thing is that this is often if not always ignored, although it constitutes a major component in Nature. I don't work on maxims, but this one sums up my work in cell biology so well. Thanks.

[greentinted]

Anonymity is for sissies.

[king_ghidorah]

I love it that no matter what one does in the academic world there is always someone who has an opinion that states one shouldn't be doing it that way.  Why would anyone bother writing such pointless tripe?  Anyone who's been there knows that academe is a pretty cool little pond, but it is also full of crabby-traps.  Anonymity may be for sissies (irony there, me thinks) but it is also for academics.

Didn't care much for his paintings much either.

[claragold]

http://www.nancyhoffmangallery.com/plag/view.html

Hey, pyshnov--
What do you think of Plagens' paintings? He's an artist, you know. Can he touch Cezanne, or is he a trash merchant too?

His paintings look like the work of art grad students.

Cezanne??! rolls eyes...

[gastr1]

His paintings look like the work of art grad students.

Cezanne??! rolls eyes...

Hmmm...No, they don't. They are not my thing, and I don't care for Plagens, but it is legitimate--and intelligent-- work. But I guess I'm going looking for windmills again, as all the "you call that art?!!" pyshnovian academics come rushing out of the woodwork, ready to lay claim to the "I don't know if it's art, but I know what I like" world championship.

Guess I should not assume. Claragold, you work with "art grad students" often?