[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: a few things
i also am not versed in film..but as an artist...and a lover of art...from
poetry to music to theater to painting to photography....enjoying in
dabbling in all of those palettes...i have my opinions about what is "good"
art. i was on my bike trainer the other morning , when a song by j-lo came
on...i nearly took the time to wipe the sweat from my forehead to change
the channel...but decided to torture myself. i apologize to any j-lo fans
out there...but i was offended by what was being presented as the #9 song
on the charts. the day before, they were playing videos of divas...such as
aretha franklin, joni mitchell, billie holiday and so on...and i was blown
away by the talent...the layers...the textures in these gifted women's
voices. and then there's j-lo...yes, a lovely woman...well-marketed
beauty...but no texture...no layers...nothing at all that spoke to me. but
our music television and radio stations tell us this is where it's "at".
it makes me want to puke. meanwhile...the talent & genius of people like
otr, mark heard, mike roe, julie miller, sam philips, lost dogs, the choir,
vol....etc and so on....this talent goes virtually undiscovered by the
general public. but ....maybe this makes these gems even more precious to
those of us who bask in their beauty....
the same goes for the visual arts... there is "art" out there and there is
ART. there are people that know how to make that happy little pine tree
look real...ah...the mountains are such a lovely shade of lavender....ok
..technically they've got something...but it fails to speak to my soul. to
each his own...but for me...it's art when it communicates...if it touches
someone's soul...whether merely by the use of color and/or composition...or
if it is much deeper...striking a resonant chord that changes my way of
thinking....leaving me breathless and in pain....or even numb...then...then
i can label it as art. but again...to each his own. i'm pretty sure that
there are often works of art that have spoken volumes to me that the artist
never intended. but in all of the layers...in all the texture...things are
communicated unknowingly...if the artist truly lives & breathes his/her
art.
whew. sorry...gotta get back to work...wishing w/ all my heart that i were
somewhere else...creating ..truly creating...letting my soul be exposed for
a little.... but alas...i must get back to ....ugh...designing children's
wear....yay...teddy bears!
sigh.....
..................twila
Hazel410 at aol_com
Sent by: To: dasmith at rotse2_physics.lsa.umich.edu,
owner-over-the-rhine@ over-the-rhine at actwin_com
actwin.com cc:
Subject: Re: a few things
05/21/2002 10:55 AM
Please respond to
Hazel410
anita said.....
>The question I think we've been dancing around is: What defines "good"?
>Is a piece good if it follows the rules?
>Or is it good if someone likes it? If the majority like it?
>Or is it good if it sells well? (Marketing professionals are nodding...)
>Or maybe if those well-versed in the subject like it?
>Or is it good because it means something to a person?
and then she said...
>.... Much modern art fails to stir my emotions.
>I guess I think "good" is a throwaway word. It's what people say when
they
>have nothing else to say. Sort of like "nice", or "it sucked." It's not
>only subjective, it's vague.
>I agree with whoever said that if you liked it, there must be a reason...
and
>the reason is interesting because it's your own. THAT can be discussed,
and
>compared to others' reasons, and so forth.
---------------
Unsubscribe by going to http://www.actwin.com/OtR/
Follow-Ups: