ART - not just pretty pics

[trendie]

What if Picasso comes into the class after Hockney?

Anyway, I think I know what you're saying.
It would have been better to start the student off on understanding the technical skill of drawing first, of composition, shadows, lines, form?
Then, once those skills are developed, the artist has the core skills to then add individual expression.
Rather than showing how to make a facsimile of something else. (the video)
In the case of the chair, teach the carpenter the skills of making strong joints, choosing the right wood, shaping the legs, etc. Once the carpenter can create a functional chair, he can then play with form, and make one with one short leg; always knowing the artistic creation is underscored by a knowledge of the technical aspect of making good joints, and of structural integrity.

 

[Pat494]

Would you have that Picasso on the wall of your house for it's artistic merit ?
Not me.
It would be in the next auction, but only escaping the garbage bin because some wealthy people mistakenly think it has great value.

 

[trendie]

Would you have that Picasso on the wall of your house for it's artistic merit ?
Not me.
It would be in the next auction, but only escaping the garbage bin because some wealthy people mistakenly think it has great value.

Actually, I wouldn't. I don't go for images with people or animals in them, generally speaking.
(no psycho-analysis, please.)
But, having read a biography of Picasso, his life and his portfolio of work, I (think I) can appreciate it.

 

[barjon]

Jon,

Whether or not the chair is fit for purpose is another red herring - as is the purpose of the artwork. Neither are relevant.


No Jon, not necessarily. Artists produce what they do for a wide gamut of reasons, including a whole genre of them whose prime objective is to produce no emotional response from the viewer whatsoever.


Shame - but fair enough. I ran all this past Pam (mine, not yours!) just to check that I haven't lost the plot. She was genuinely surprised by yours, Pat's and cant's response and can't understand why you don't accept my point. She went on to say that if she went to a life drawing class (she never has and says she can't draw) and David Hockney walks in and starts drawing then, all other things being equal, he will produce a better quality life drawing than she does. If I was in the class, my effort might be a bit better than hers but nowhere near as good as Hockney's. Or, if you prefer, his would be 'fit for purpose' whereas mine and Pam's less so. You might even prefer one of our drawings for whatever reason(s), (beauty's in the eye . . .) but that wouldn't change that fact that Hockney's work is of (much) higher quality.
Tim.

Tim, I guess you are talking “artistic merit” which I appreciate does not rely on whether I like it or not. However, who are the determinants of artistic merit and it sounds as though this is the province of only those who “understand” art. I contend that the customer, intended audience - the beholder if you will - also has a say.

When I last visited the Tate Modern I was greeted by an overflowing toilet bowl with a trail of shit snaking across the gallery floor. Someone must have thought it had artistic merit but shit about summed it up for me ( perhaps that was the artist’s intention! ) so I couldn’t give a tuppeny cuss about what the artistic merit was supposed to be. Nor do I care about any hidden meaning that may have been intended, by my book it was unadulterated rubbish with no artistic merit whatsoever.

 

[timsk]

Tim, I guess you are talking “artistic merit” which I appreciate does not rely on whether I like it or not. However, who are the determinants of artistic merit and it sounds as though this is the province of only those who “understand” art. I contend that the customer, intended audience - the beholder if you will - also has a say.

When I last visited the Tate Modern I was greeted by an overflowing toilet bowl with a trail of shit snaking across the gallery floor. Someone must have thought it had artistic merit but shit about summed it up for me ( perhaps that was the artist’s intention! ) so I couldn’t give a tuppeny cuss about what the artistic merit was supposed to be. Nor do I care about any hidden meaning that may have been intended, by my book it was unadulterated rubbish with no artistic merit whatsoever.

Mornin' Jon,
Your description of the piece that confronted you when you last visited Tate Modern is interesting because it clearly made a huge impression on you. My guess is that subscribers to this thread aren't the first to hear your comments about it. So, if the artist's intention is to leave a lasting impression - albeit an unfavourable one - then s/he has grounds to claim that the work is successful. Whether or not that is a legitimate - let alone worthwhile - artistic pursuit is a topic for another day. As for its quality - I can't comment as I've not seen it and know nothing about it other than what you've outlined here. I accept completely that you don't like it and, from your description, I suspect I wouldn't either. However, my point throughout these exchanges is that your dislike of it (and mine if I saw it) does not determine - or even hint at - whether it is any good or not. Someone else may love it and, by the same token, that doesn't make it good. Just imagine the quagmire of saccharine dross that would engulf us all if every artist only ever produced pretty pics in the hope of extracting the same response of 'oh, that's good - I like that'. If we extend this to contemporary music - we'd all have to be content with the vapid output of One Direction and Justin Bieber et al, as artists that want to challenge the norm, experiment and expand the musical envelope would never get recording contracts.

Jon, I really wish that you, Pat or cant' could explain to me why you're so wedded to the idea that the quality of any given work of art is reflected by how much you (dis)like it and why it's so hard for you to accept that the two things are in fact completely separate and unrelated? I am genuinely as baffled by this as I am dismayed by it.
Tim.

 

[barjon]

Mornin' Jon,
.........However, my point throughout these exchanges is that your dislike of it (and mine if I saw it) does not determine - or even hint at - whether it is any good or not........
Tim.

As I said at the start of my last post I understand and accept your point. My point is that the determinant of good or not should include the perception of the common man (beholder) and not just the elite of the art world. Aside from an objective appreciation of the technical process and perhaps form etc it seems to me that experts can only apply a subjective judgement to other elements that go to make up a work of artistic quality. That subjective judgement must inevitably be coloured by the individuals own perceptions (beauty for example). So beholders can make that judgement too.

There is, of course, an indefinable power that emanates from the top dogs. For example, when I spot a picture screaming out at me from across the room in a wall of modern art it inevitably turns out to be a Picasso even though I don’t much care for his stuff. How you judge that I don’t know but it’s certainly there.

 

[Signalcalc]

Talking of wall art, has anyone wandered around Glasgow in the last couple of years, every city should be doing more of this

 

[timsk]

Hi Jon,

As I said at the start of my last post I understand and accept your point.

Well, finally - thank heavens for that! Forgive me if I overlooked this given that as recently as your post #433 you were still disputing it. Anyway, here's hoping I've managed to convince Pat and cant' too!

My point is that the determinant of good or not should include the perception of the common man (beholder) and not just the elite of the art world. Aside from an objective appreciation of the technical process and perhaps form etc it seems to me that experts can only apply a subjective judgement to other elements that go to make up a work of artistic quality. That subjective judgement must inevitably be coloured by the individuals own perceptions (beauty for example).

Professionals, be they artists, critics, gallery owners or curators etc. are exactly that: professionals. Handing over their jobs to people who don't have their knowledge, skill and experience would be disastrous, much as it would be in any other discipline. Just as you wouldn't want anyone other than a qualified gas registered plumber to install and service your central heating system, it's right and proper that the professionals of the art world dictate what we look at in places like Tate Modern. After all, you wouldn't want a complete novice that doesn't know his u-bend from his bell-end to install your plumbing, so I see no case for expecting the complete novice that knows diddly squat about art to have any input into what graces the walls of our national galleries and museums. As I think we can now agree: 'I like it' - ergo it's good' simply doesn't cut it.

I accept and agree completely that the the elite as you call them get it wrong on occasion and, when they do, it's perfectly okay for the layman to call them out on it - as you've done with the Tate Modern 'shit' exhibit. But I wouldn't want you to be allowed the veto on that - or any other piece to be displayed - as you're not qualified for the role. (I'm not getting at you Jon - the same applies to me.) For the most part, I believe that the pro's are objective, although some degree of subjectivity is involved. Where they tend to go awry is when they allow things like politics, fashion and, latterly, 'woke' culture to influence their decision making. I suspect Charlotte Prodger who won the Turner Prize last year won't produce work that will stand the test of time and the decision to award her the prize will mark a low point in the award's long and illustrious history. That's just my layman's view, the pro's may - and some presumably do - think otherwise.

There is, of course, an indefinable power that emanates from the top dogs. For example, when I spot a picture screaming out at me from across the room in a wall of modern art it inevitably turns out to be a Picasso even though I don’t much care for his stuff. How you judge that I don’t know but it’s certainly there.

Agreed!
😜
Tim.

 

[barjon]

...........Just as you wouldn't want anyone other than a qualified gas registered plumber to install and service your central heating system........

Absolutely, but I would expect to have a say if he was deciding which equally efficient boiler and system to install on the basis of their visual design.

 

[Pat494]

I expect Tim is just itching to show us his work.
So come on ole boy be brave. Who knows we may like it. At least you can expect some good manners if anyone doesn't.
You may hold some of us ordinary art critics in contempt but maybe our comments should not be swept into the gutter. We may point you in another and better direction. You never know !

 

[timsk]

I expect Tim is just itching to show us his work.
So come on ole boy be brave. Who knows we may like it. At least you can expect some good manners if anyone doesn't.
You may hold some of us ordinary art critics in contempt but maybe our comments should not be swept into the gutter. We may point you in another and better direction. You never know !

Hi Pat,
Fair enough. I've created a Google Photos album especially for you: For Pat

A couple of things to mention: I describe myself simply as a mosaicist - as opposed to a mosaic artist, as I'm not convinced that anything I produce warrants the art label. Besides which, the art 'elite' in the UK are clear on the matter: mosaics are definitely not art. It's a different story on the continent - especially France and Italy - where they are held in high regard. (Mosaics in general I mean, not mine!) The other thing to point out is that the first piece (black & white circles) is a joint effort with my wife. I designed it and she made it, so the choice of 'tesserae' (i.e. each individual piece of mosaic) are hers.

Feel free to be as damning as you like - go for it. That said, I'll issue you all with a small challenge. If you think a piece (or all of them!) is utter shite - that's absolutely fine - but please explain why you think that. What don't you like about it, e.g. the composition, choice of materials or colours used etc.
Tim.

 

[0007]

I like your mosaics! The Romans knew a thing or two about mosaics and I remember seeing some remarkable displays on view in Leicester. It was also very interesting to learn how they were laid out to the design – getting the symmetry etc correct using just a piece of string and a couple of pegs. What materials are your mosaics made from and what's the design process?

Lastly – top marks for exhibiting your work & its results – we don't see too many traders doing like this with their stuff!

 

[Pat494]

Well done Tim answering the challenge.
Have to say not my kind of art but should be good for a carpet or something.

 

[timsk]

. . . Have to say not my kind of art but should be good for a carpet or something.

Hi Pat,
Well, all I can say is well done to you on the ultimate insult that I hadn't seen coming. 10 /10! I was prepared for you to say that my mosaics are utter shite and that your cat could have done better. So, as insults go, I gotta hand to you - comparing my work to an effing ***king carpet is right up there!!!*
Be that as it may, here's hoping that others will offer a more insightful commentary on my work along the lines that I requested.
Tim.
* Nothing against carpets per se: I have a small collection of Kilims that I absolutely adore.

 

[timsk]

I like your mosaics! The Romans knew a thing or two about mosaics and I remember seeing some remarkable displays on view in Leicester. It was also very interesting to learn how they were laid out to the design – getting the symmetry etc correct using just a piece of string and a couple of pegs. What materials are your mosaics made from and what's the design process?

Lastly – top marks for exhibiting your work & its results – we don't see too many traders doing like this with their stuff!

Thanks 0007 - too kind!
The design process starts with a kernel of an idea which I explore with multiple iterations in a sketch book before arriving at a final design that is then scaled up and transferred to the substrate the mosaic is built on - usually MDF or plywood. Each individual tesserae is cut by hand using wheeled nippers and glued in place one at a time. The bulk of my work uses two types of 25mm square tile: unglazed porcelain and glass. The holy grail for most mosaicists is 'Smalti': hand made glass from just two producers in Italy. The precise manufacturing process is a secret and handed down from one generation to the next like a favourite family recipe. Needless to say, it's fearsomely expensive and few can afford to use it as their prime material. The Chinese have tried to mimic it but, as with so many things they copy, the quality isn't there. The roman mosaics you've seen were probably made from natural stone and marble, especially if they were on the the floor - as they're very hard wearing. These materials are still popular with mosaicists today - but they're expensive and the colour palette is limited. If you like the old stuff, the mecca for mosaicists is Ravenna in Italy, which boasts no less than seven (I think) Unesco world heritage sites. Here's a link to another Google Photos album with some snaps I took when I went there a few years ago: Ravenna
Tim.

 

[Pat494]

Ooooooops Tim are you not being a bit over sensitive ?
Did I not praise your courage ?
You shouldn't have requested praise but earned it imho.
Do you really want me to tell porkies to assuage your ego ?
I was polite as promised. and didn't say whoever gave you an honours degree for such crap must be insane !

 

[timsk]

Pat,

Ooooooops Tim are you not being a bit over sensitive ?

A number of conditions would need to be met for me to be overly sensitive. Top of the list is that I'd I'd need to respect your opinion.

Did I not praise your courage ?

Yes, you did. Thank you.

You shouldn't have requested praise but earned it imho.

Nowhere have I ever "requested praise". Grrrr!

Do you really want me to tell porkies to assuage your ego ?

No, I was merely hoping for some half intelligent feedback - nothing more.

I was polite as promised. and didn't say whoever gave you an honours degree for such crap must be insane !

That you think it's crap is fine - I have absolutely no issue with that. My beef is that you don't understand the basics about art, evidenced by your inability to offer any reasoning - not one single thing - as to why you think it's crap. Yet the thread title falsely gives members the impression that you know what you're talking about. It's akin to a novice trader whose sole rationale for hitting the buy button is 'it looked like it was about to go up' starting a thread entitled: 'TRADING - not just shoot from the hip gambling'.
Tim.

 

[barjon]

Tim

Enjoyed those pics. Particularly liked the 11th one in - the blue, yellow, green and red crown type piece. What sort of size is it? Must take hours of close work - look after your eyes!

 

[timsk]

Tim

Enjoyed those pics. Particularly liked the 11th one in - the blue, yellow, green and red crown type piece. What sort of size is it? Must take hours of close work - look after your eyes!

Cheers Jon,
Yes, they take a long time to make, in the region of two weeks for the one you've picked out. I can't give an exact size of the piece as it's all wrapped up in bubble wrap and tidied away in the loft. But, roughly, it's about 600mm wide x 500mm high (ish). Btw, it's for sale if you're interested - no reasonable offer refused!
😜

 

[0007]

Tim – I go back a few posts ago where I think you said that one of the first skills an artist need to master is that of drawing. Now I think about it, subconsciously that has been quite apparent for me but I didn't really realise it. When you look at some of the great artists e.g. Leonardo, who appear to me to have been masters of drawing it's again apparent but as a layman it's not until someone formally explains it to you that the full implication is appreciated. It just goes to show that (IMHO) to understand anything properly you do need to take a formal course of instruction – having done that you are then in a much better position to draw your own conclusions, albeit they might be different from your instructor's. All of my favourite Norfolk landscape & wildlife artists start off with their sketchbook and a drawing. And when you look at the work of great artists that has undergone conservation/restoration there always seems to be a drawing underneath.

I do think that your "drawing observation" needs re-emphasis since it seems to have been quietly overlooked in the ensuing discussion. The attached picture (and my camera phone doesn't do it justice) has an incredible amount of drawing underlay and it was that which caught my eye and led to its purchase. My suspicion is that even without the "colouring -in" this would still be an appealing piece of work for me.