About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unreadPage 0Page 1Forward one pageLast Page


Sanction: 7, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 7, No Sanction: 0
Post 0

Friday, August 12, 2005 - 8:11amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
The woman looks bored, perhaps for good reason; her partner has no arms and no penis.

Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 1

Friday, August 12, 2005 - 8:17amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

The woman looks bored, perhaps for good reason; her partner has no arms and no penis.


He must be a liberal...

;o)


Sanction: 7, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 7, No Sanction: 0
Post 2

Friday, August 12, 2005 - 9:41amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Wow, what a neat studio you have, Michael! ;-)
Those big canvases are really impressive. 

Like your new site. Except that your art is not as accessible as in the old site, yet. I see this is still a work in progress. Good luck with it!

BTW, like your new California landscapes a lot, more than the previous Florida ones for some reason. Maybe it's because there is a lot more variations - I particularly like those mountains, high desert, and cliffs!

Hong




Post 3

Friday, August 12, 2005 - 11:57amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
ARRrrgh! The link won't open for me. Keeps timing out.

Post 4

Friday, August 12, 2005 - 12:18pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Great work, Michael. I love the California sketches.

J

Post 5

Friday, August 12, 2005 - 12:49pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Summer,

He must be a liberal...
Love it, I could be laughing for quite a while.



Post 6

Friday, August 12, 2005 - 2:34pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Thanks Michael,

I like it. Unfortunately, I am not able to open the thumbnail images on your website.

However, both the picture here (as seen previously in the FR) and others at the site look great. I love your use of light and illumination.


Post 7

Friday, August 12, 2005 - 7:59pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Marcus,

This piece reminds me of Maxfield Parrish.  If you are not familiar here is a link:  http://www.crossstitchpatterngall.com/maxfield-parrish.htm


Sanction: 3, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 3, No Sanction: 0
Post 8

Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 5:34amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
A CHEAP SHOT (PART 1)
[Michael Newberry accused me of a "cheap shot" at him when I said that too much romantic realism resembles social realism.  Here is my reply to him on that, sent via SOLO mail.]

Michael, with rare exceptions, I never label anybody.  If you are asking for criticism from me, considering that I got a B in Art History and a D in Art Studio, Man from Manhattan looks like social realism and Woman in Blue does not. 
Art is tough to judge.  In Cleveland, we have the museum's annual May Show and one of the criteria is "How long did it take?"  and one artist not selected replied, "It took me all my life, of course, or I couldn't have painted it."  If you are good with a brush, you can work quickly, but then, the next question is, "What does this mean?" 
These guys on cable-tv paint a landscape in 20 minutes.  Landscapes are at once meaningless and insightful.  There is not much morality in brute nature -- except in how you perceive it.  I have never seen a cable-tv landscape that reflected my own deepest values.
But I have seen social realist art that does.
When I run up against a group of stupid people -- engineers in committee, for instance -- and I have to be among them (say, I actually have a job), I find one of those pictures of Lenin Addressing the Workers and put it up in my office to remind myself that "someone has to tell these people what to to."
Another one of my social realist favorites is the statue, "Swords into Plowshares." 
Anarchist Bob Black advocates a "ludic" society based on play.  He points out that socialism and capitalism alike define people by their work and in both systems, those who do not work shall not eat.  I mention this because among the many scenes in David Lean's Dr. Zhivago (1965) that were emotional for me was one reflective of both social realism and romantic realism.   After telling his niece the true story of her father, General Zhivago asks the girl about her boyfriend and she says, "He runs that," and points to the hydroelectric plant which fills the camera.
As for not labeling people -- and the exceptions to that -- allow me to close with this.  When I was in high school, my senior year English teacher had a drama class.  Unlike the kids doing Our Town or Carousel, this group was off-Broadway, experimental.  I watched a rehearsal.  Atfterward, I said to my teacher that it was obvious that some of these kids do not have talent.  He said that when he was in college, he was in a company in NYC whose director was famous for saying that to Marlon Brando when he was off-Broadway.  So, I learned early not to announce value judgments -- regardless of what Ayn Rand claimed.  There are exceptions.  We all engage in banter and argumentation and dialectic.  The online world is "fluid print."  So, we all have opinions here on SOLO.  One of the regulars whom I find singularly open to criticism is Tibor Machan.  He never says anything interesting, exciting, novel, or insightful.  He just tells us what we already know.  He repeats what we want to hear.
Philosophical writing is not supposed to do that.  Art is.
Michael



Post 9

Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 5:58amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
 A CHEAP SHOT, part 2.
Robert Davison wrote: "The woman looks bored, perhaps for good reason; her partner has no arms and no penis."
Bob, do you have a URL to some of your own paintings?  Maybe you have a different medium, music, perhaps?
Hong Zhang wrote: "BTW, like your new California landscapes a lot, more than the previous Florida ones for some reason. Maybe it's because there is a lot more variations - I particularly like those mountains, high desert, and cliffs! "
Well, yes, there is that about the West in general and California in particular.  A cable-tv landscape painter can create "interesting" pictures of California.  Where Newberry shows his talent is in delivering the tension in a seascape.  This is not a hackneyed "storm at sea" or the "pounding surf" or the cloying "Waves of Horses."  These are just waves, about two or three feet to the curl, not special in any dramatic way -- until you realize what you are looking at.  These are not "natural" waves, these are "ideal" waves, naturally portrayed. It is hard to do that.  It requires a special talent of insight to perceive and a fine and practiced talent to create. 
"... for some reason. Maybe ..."
What would John Galt say to Richard Halley about that?


Post 10

Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 10:47amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Michael,

You are no longer lurking in the shadows here.  Your lastest posts have an edge, a forceful opinion, that was lacking in the past.  You are certainly taking on a sacred cow, by tackling the enigmatic or perhaps simply shy, Mr. Machan.  He is either difficult to engage or incredibly condescending.  I suspect much of what he posts here is recycled. 

One of the regulars whom I find singularly open to criticism is Tibor Machan.  He never says anything interesting, exciting, novel, or insightful.  He just tells us what we already know.  He repeats what we want to hear.
Philosophical writing is not supposed to do that.  Art is.
I probably agree with your assessment of philosophical writing, but we disagree if this is your assessment of Art.  If I understand correctly, you are telling me Art should match my sofa.

I don't paint, I am a theatrical director.


Post 11

Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 6:20pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Michael-
It appears as if all the time and effort put forth will be fruitful.  I really like the design of the new site.  I'm glad to see Denouement on the front page!

Robert-
Boredom??!


Sanction: 7, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 7, No Sanction: 0
Post 12

Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 6:42pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Michael informs me that my joke about his painting was rude.  I am sorry that he was offended, but I don't find opinions rude, they are often wrong, but it is never rude to hold one. He also assures me that my rheumy old eyes deceive me and that the man has both arms and a penis. 

I apologize for my joke at his expense and want all to bear witness to the fact that I have the sense to recognize an artist of merit and of quality.  I wish him the very best.

Wolf 


Sanction: 17, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 17, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 17, No Sanction: 0
Post 13

Saturday, August 13, 2005 - 7:10pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I have to disagree with Michael about Robert "Wolf" Davison's rudeness. It's not just a matter of rudeness, it's a matter of the vision of a troll. Davison is a long established troll, in evolution and in art as well.

Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 4, No Sanction: 0
Post 14

Sunday, August 14, 2005 - 2:29pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
    Well, one of *my* 'interpretations' is:
    OF COURSE he's got a penis; else what're they doing there? Seeable or not, the painting has no 'framework-of-meaning' to begin with otherwise. -- However, Mr. Happy has fallen asleep (and his caretaker is going fast). Can we guess why?
    Re the 'bored' woman: to my mind she's trying to move (lifting her arm) and is, er, barely succeeding; not much energy. Can we guess why?
    They had such a great time, neither can hardly move (He's probably even saying "Whew!")

    OTOH:
     After an hour, they're both still frustrated. Can we guess why?
     No, that doesn't work; the lamp's on the floor behind him. That would ONLY happen in the throes of...uncontrolled activity shall we say? So, back to my 1st interpretation.

    I think a good title for it would have been "After..."

    But, I wonder the meanings (if any?) re the paintings on the wall...........?

LLAP
J-D


Post 15

Sunday, August 14, 2005 - 2:55pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
And if there are no meanings - why there?


Post 16

Monday, August 15, 2005 - 10:24amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

Interesting input, thanks for the compliments and corrections. John’s comments were a pleasure to read. And he asked: “But, I wonder the meanings (if any?) re the paintings on the wall...........?”

 

Yes, those paintings on the wall have meaning! They solve compositional elements and give the right kind of character to the room as well as the people in it. In an emotional symbolic way their subject matter “tells” us what has taken place in the room. Like Rand’s view of every sentence in Atlas, I could tell you why every ¼” is painted the way it is, but that takes us mostly into the “grammar” of painting. A year and half of full-time work into the painting I thought I would have a few more weeks to finished it; those few weeks turned into 9 months, triple-checking every speck of paint, to be exactly what I wanted. I feel now, 18 years later, complete exaltation with it.

 

Speaking of exaltation, another meaning viewers could take away with them would be that having real art “on the walls” is integral to it.

 

Michael

(Edited by Newberry on 8/15, 10:32am)

(Edited by Newberry on 8/15, 10:39am)


Post 17

Monday, August 15, 2005 - 11:15amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
    Thanx for the clarification, Michael. As I specified in my 'profile,' I'm not really up on complete 'understanding' of varied art-works re all the considerations that (well, 'good') artists put into such, unfortunately including paintings/sculptings. I thought there was some meaning re the background paintings but couldn't pin it down. Also, I did get a 'gestalt'-impression of what you specified (I always thought there was something to "Subliminal Seduction," if any remember that subject from the late '70's); I should have added that in my comments.
    Had I the money, I'd hang it in our living room, (after my wife and I 'discussed' it.)

LLAP
J-D


Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Post 18

Monday, August 15, 2005 - 11:43amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit

Newberry said: Another meaning viewers could take away with them would be that having real art on your walls is integral to exaltation!

 

Ha!

 

That little gem of self-promotion was shameless!

 

But …

 

true.

 

By the age of 17, I had already learned that one doesn’t need to be a composer or musician to delight and derive tremendous inspiration from the higher forms of music. By my early 20s, the music of Tchaikovsky, Wagner and Beethoven had become integral mechanisms by which to accentuate my ‘sense of life’. The transition that occured, was away from a music that reflected my emotional state, towards music that mirrored my spiritual state.

 

A year ago my walls were covered with cheap poster reproductions of Turners and Hoppers, along with an assortment of knick-knacks splashed around haphazardly; today, this is no longer the case. What I had learned about music at 17, took until the age of 41 to learn about art. The poster reproductions and knick-knack junk are gone; they have been replaced with the living. The walls are now somewhat barren, but what there is: sings.

 

George

 

PS: Before someone jumps on me, yes, there are still a few reproductions on my walls; I am not a billionaire that can afford a genuine Vermeer. The difference is, that they are no longer bought casually because the ‘tune was catchy’, or because it ‘works’ with my sofa color.

(Edited by George W. Cordero on 8/15, 11:49am)


Post 19

Monday, August 15, 2005 - 2:18pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
A painting of naked people in my living room? No way! ;-)



Post to this threadPage 0Page 1Forward one pageLast Page


User ID Password or create a free account.