Apparent Confusion about Artistic Expression

[David H. Bebbington]

It's a craft if she does it, but if Tibetan monks do it as Mandala Sand Paintings, does it now become art?

A very interesting point - I think I'd have to say craft again, because the painting is done as a formal act of religious devotion rather than an act of personal expression or exploration (I'd regard the architecture of medieval cathedrals as craft by the same reasoning). I admire the monks' mindset - I could not bring myself to work on something for 6 days and then destroy it for any reason at all!

Regards,

David

 

[mark]

SYbolism is a tricky beast. Unless the author is willing to discuss and tell the stories behind their images, thus putting the viewer in a similar mindset as the author, the images symbols will most likely be A: ignored, B:missed entirely or wrongly interpreted, or C: barely grasped by the viewer and definately not with the importance the author intended.

 

[Donald Miller]

I have to agree with this statement as well Donald. It seems that those that agree with your comments are welcome to "discuss". Those with a dissenting view or that think you are the one spreading BS are considered pariahs, malcontents and viewed as attackers. It should occur to you that there are those that may come to the conclusion that it is you who are the sensitive and defensive one.

Bill

Well Bill, I fail to see where I can do anything to meet your damned approval. I opened it for discussion and Ray jumped right in the middle of my stuff...then when I do discuss you claim that I am on a soapbox...so perhaps you and I need to agree to disagree and you just found your way to the same place that Ray is...perhaps you can commisurate...

 

[David H. Bebbington]

This was going to produce a knee-jerk reaction of, "Me! I disagree!", but on further thought ... I haven't been able to pin down with any sort of certainty what is meant by "creativity". I also realize that I really do not know what is meant by "good technique", either.

With all that... I really think the time line in, "Good technique liberates creativity", is reversed. With me, the "flash", the inspiration, comes first, then the necessity of "the technique". Example: I realize what - I want to make an image of an apple. With that, I must now decide HOW, a.k.a., "select the technique", or acquire the technique, as is appropriate.

A wonderful artist, Helen Van Wyk, once said it: The DOING is really not hard. We can all learn that. The What-to-do is the hard part.

Can't quite follow you on this one - if you decide to make an image of an apple and then and only then start to learn how to operate a camera, paintbrush or WHY, I think you won't get too far! One the other hand, if your technique is good enough (like, for example, that of a jazz musician), as soon as you think it, you can do it!

Regards,

David

 

[Ray Heath]

so Don, how many people are on your shit list

 

[MurrayMinchin]

I was trying to understand Donald's change of heart, because I remember him saying the following in a thread I started here in the Ethics and Phoilosophy forum;

"You know with all of this self proffessed angst it is no wonder to me that no one is accomplishing much of anything worthwhile.

Rather the vomiting out of this self centered drivel it might be worthwhile to search the archives...it probably has been said before...ad nauseum."

(It was said here) (there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Then it dawned one me after seeing the workshop announcement...could this be advertising?

You know Donald, you might get more interest if you didn't keep insulting your potential workshop attendee's photography.

Murray

 

[Ed Sukach]

Ed,

i agree entirely
but consider this - if Donald's symbolic message is so very important to him, but i don't get it, then at the level he intends, they are failures
by his reckoning, not mine
i didn't say they must meet my requirements, but it seems, in my case, they didn't meet his

And ...? Isn't there something of a great transference here? *I* - or anyone else (present company not excepted) have the ability to decide whether or not the photographer has met "the level he intends"?
I KNOW I cannot do that. I think that determination ... whether or not the work is "successful"... can only be left to the photographer.

What about it, Donald? Does your work "meet the level you had intended"?
What were your "requirements" ? ... or ... were there any?

As for me - I refuse to worry about "requirements". I'll just DO. Once in a while, I'll get a "good one".

 

[clay]

“Society is unattainable,” says Baudrillard; however, according to la Fournier , it is not so much society that is unattainable, but rather the failure, and eventually the absurdity, of society. Any number of discourses concerning not, in fact, theory, but posttheory may be found. Thus, Lyotard uses the term ‘neotextual narrative’ to denote a mythopoetical whole.

In the works of Smith, a predominant concept is the distinction between destruction and creation. Several discourses concerning semioticist nihilism exist. In a sense, the example of expressionism prevalent in the Neo-Dadaist image of a pool of water is a masterful synecdoche of paleo-nativist atavistic yearnings for paradisical utopias.

Clearly, the subject matter is contextualised/juxtaposed into a Sartre-ist existentialist melange that includes art/life as a totality. It could be said that Bataille uses the term ‘expressionism’ to denote the role of the observer as artist. It is just as evident that a Hegelian dialectic does not exist, nor is desirable in the context of radical social dialogue between artist and society.

While the subject can be interpolated into a Sartreist existentialism that includes sexuality as a reality, it is also arguably true that this same sexual dialectic/discourse has nothing to do with art in general, but rather serves as method for the continuation of the human species. Therefore, Debord uses the term ‘expressionism’ to denote the rubicon, and subsequent failure, of semantic sexual identity, while totally ignoring how much pleasure can be derived from immersion in the same socio-politico-vegetable-oil wading pool out in the back yard.

The premise of Sartreist existentialism holds that the collective is capable of significance. It could be said that Marx promotes the use of subcapitalist capitalism to read art.

Just some quick thoughts on the way to the shower.

 

[Donald Miller]

I was trying to understand Donald's change of heart, because I remember him saying the following in a thread I started here in the Ethics and Phoilosophy forum;

"You know with all of this self proffessed angst it is no wonder to me that no one is accomplishing much of anything worthwhile.

Rather the vomiting out of this self centered drivel it might be worthwhile to search the archives...it probably has been said before...ad nauseum."

(It was said here) (there was a url link here which no longer exists)

Then it dawned one me after seeing the workshop announcement...could this be advertising?

You know Donald, you might get more interest if you didn't keep insulting your potential workshop attendee's photography.

Murray

Murray, color yourself gone too...have a good day.

 

[Donald Miller]

And ...? Isn't there something of a great transference here? *I* - or anyone else (present company not excepted) have the ability to decide whether or not the photographer has met "the level he intends"?
I KNOW I cannot do that. I think that determination ... whether or not the work is "successful"... can only be left to the photographer.

What about it, Donald? Does your work "meet the level you had intended"?
What were your "requirements" ? ... or ... were there any?

As for me - I refuse to worry about "requirements". I'll just DO. Once in a while, I'll get a "good one".

Ed, thanks for your contributions on the subject. My work meets the inner expression of a self that I am slowly coming to recognize...So who am I to judge what manner it finds expression of truth to me..

 

[Ray Heath]

Ed, Donald can't know, normally, whether his work 'meets the level he intends' or not, he puts the work out there and the viewer responds to it

if he feels he must come to me after my viewing and belittle my supposed lack of awareness of 'symbolism' and explain his work, then the work, as presented, is not relating the message that he first intended, i.e. it has failed

 

[bill schwab]

Well Bill, I fail to see where I can do anything to meet your damned approval.

Donald, I fail to see why my approval should be an issue here? If you would stop being so damned defensive, you might see that we are actually pretty close in our thinking on this subject. It is the work you back your position with that I find troubling. By stating ".... show me something new!!!" you have implied that somehow your work accomplishes this. Forgive me, but I just fail to see what is "new" about your approach to symbolism in artistic expression. If you will look back you will see I have shown no disrespect to your work, just your assertion that it is somehow something that the images in the "desert of illustration", as you call APUG's galleries, are not. You have yet to explain this.

Bill

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

Just some quick thoughts on the way to the shower.

Sounds like you stopped at the Postmodernism Generator on the way to the shower, Clay--

http://www.elsewhere.org/pomo

 

[bill schwab]

My work meets the inner expression of a self that I am slowly coming to recognize...

Very well put. Bravo!

So who am I to judge what manner it finds expression of truth to me..

If you truly believe this, then why judge or belittle what others see (or don't see) in that same work?

Bill

 

[jovo]

..... a masterful synecdoche of paleo-nativist atavistic yearnings for paradisical utopias.

Just some quick thoughts on the way to the shower.

i usually say exactly that while in the bathroom...but not usually in the shower.

 

[jimgalli]

I always seem to be the last one to the party.

I think many, and especially here at this great site, are on similar journeys. We begin with vision. We have to learn at least enough technique to get the vision onto paper. That's a struggle for most of us but the journey is largely the reward in itself. Then you wake up one AM and that part of your journey is largely over. You've climbed the mountain you set for yourself and you're standing on a plateau saying to yourself where do I go next? Now that I've got the skill-set, what can I do with it that's one iota different than what has already been done? And those are good questions! But you have to realize that you're just one in 10,000 others that got to that same plateau and asked the same questions.

Many folks get to that point and find it a brick wall. How many times have you read about someone who showed promise but just quit one day because they didn't know what to do next that was "different".

I am struggling with identical issues. For me at least, I've assigned myself the most difficult of the possible roads that lead from this intersection. People. Portraiture is the most daunting thing possible to try to do well with my personality. I'm shy, retiring, insecure, suffer from inferiority complex. Always have. But people are always old, always new. We never tire of looking at ourselves. So I've given myself the assignment of doing portraiture differently and better somehow than anyone else has done previously.

That's at least a mountain I'll never get to the top of. I haven't even scratched the surface yet.

One final word to the wise. Just because you've made it to the plateau like many others before you, don't look around at everyone elses work and get judgemental. Like Murray, I looked at your website and your gallery and I see a lot of really fine images that I would have been proud to call my own, but they aren't any different than the ones that came before them. Indeed, probably inspired them.

Symbolism:

3 Model A's​

The photograph above was made a few months ago. It speaks to me deeply. I haven't gotten to the bottom of it. What does it represent. There's symbolism there that I haven't unearthed yet. Like the red eyes peering out of the darkness in old cartoons. Somehow it is a shunt to some deep place in my soul.

MY SOUL. To the rest of you it is very likely the dumbest bit of nothing you've ever seen and you would marvel that someone would go to the bother to make it.

And so photography and personal expression goes.

 

[clay]

Busted! But I added a few touches of my own.

That POMO generator is the best damn thing yet for writing artist's statements!

I just thought it would be a good idea to throw some more ideas on the fire here.

Sounds like you stopped at the Postmodernism Generator on the way to the shower, Clay--

http://www.elsewhere.org/pomo

 

[bill schwab]

Many folks get to that point and find it a brick wall. How many times have you read about someone who showed promise but just quit one day because they didn't know what to do next that was "different".

Very good point Jim. I enjoyed your post. Photography/art is very much like the game of golf. Anyone, with a little practice and technique, can hold their own on the course. It is that extra step to greatness that eludes so many of us. It certainly doesn't stop you from trying and continuing to play the game.

Like Murray, I looked at your website and your gallery and I see a lot of really fine images that I would have been proud to call my own, but they aren't any different than the ones that came before them.

Was there somewhere that Murray claimed that his work was in anyway "new" or any different than another's?.

Bill

 

[jd callow]

I think what got my hackles up as well as some others posting is the perhaps wrongly perceived holier than thou attitude you projected. As was said more eloquently than I could possibly have said it in a private message that just came to me, your "... call for discussion would go over much better if it had been made from lower ground."

Peace, Bill

What an excellent comment/suggestion. I feel I could put a dog in this race, but thought better when I saw the over all tone.

From where I sit I feel that materials are important and often critical, equipment is important and often critical, process is important and often critical and understanding these items is important if not critical with regard to making a photograph.

It also seems apparent to me that you create a dialog between the image, viewer and photograph maker, The dialog needs to be coherent and the message uses the elements of those depicted in scene and is translated by the experience of the viewers. The more complex the message sometimes the better, often the simplest things can be compelling. There has to be a skill of understanding our commonality.

At the end it is possible to take a meaningful image without skills, but it is far less likely to occur. I have read about those who art direct their work and do none of the work. I have also read about artists who pick up a camera and chimp with it and call the results art. I have met many many people who worked to become a painter, sculptor, photographer with the thought they would be artists. None would tell you that the technical is not material to their pursuit. Most people who consider themselves artist have a special relationship with their tool and process. If is more often than not that the relationship and process is visible in the final product, making it integral to the art.

I have another theory. That is that when we (any of us) are at our best doing or being amongst the things we love 'We sing the body electric*' we become artists we fill up those present even if we are alone. I would call this art.

*Walt Whitman

 

[jimgalli]

Was there somewhere that Murray claimed that his work was in anyway "new" or any different than another's?.

Bill

Perhaps not. But I took his "challenge" as that.

So what must take place before all of the technical bull crap comes into play? It seems that we must be open to the potential of expression of something new or of something expressed in a new way. All of the trees, snowdrifts, clouds, rocks, and waterfalls in the world are not new. I see those things every minute of my life...show me something new!!!!

I've been reading Szarkowski's Looking at Photographs of late and it seems Photography with a capitol P hit this brick wall en masse sometime in the late 1950's. We realized we needed to be "new" "fresh" blah blah blah and the work done from the late '50's onward is some of the most boring tripe ever conceived. In fact I found I couldn't finish John's book because the pictures from the 60's and 70's had no value for me what-so-ever. I think therefore there is a danger in trying to be "new" for the sake of being new. It largely doesn't work.

 

[Donald Miller]

I always seem to be the last one to the party.

I think many, and especially here at this great site, are on similar journeys. We begin with vision. We have to learn at least enough technique to get the vision onto paper. That's a struggle for most of us but the journey is largely the reward in itself. Then you wake up one AM and that part of your journey is largely over. You've climbed the mountain you set for yourself and you're standing on a plateau saying to yourself where do I go next? Now that I've got the skill-set, what can I do with it that's one iota different than what has already been done? And those are good questions! But you have to realize that you're just one in 10,000 others that got to that same plateau and asked the same questions.

Many folks get to that point and find it a brick wall. How many times have you read about someone who showed promise but just quit one day because they didn't know what to do next that was "different".

I am struggling with identical issues. For me at least, I've assigned myself the most difficult of the possible roads that lead from this intersection. People. Portraiture is the most daunting thing possible to try to do well with my personality. I'm shy, retiring, insecure, suffer from inferiority complex. Always have. But people are always old, always new. We never tire of looking at ourselves. So I've given myself the assignment of doing portraiture differently and better somehow than anyone else has done previously.

That's at least a mountain I'll never get to the top of. I haven't even scratched the surface yet.

One final word to the wise. Just because you've made it to the plateau like many others before you, don't look around at everyone elses work and get judgemental. Like Murray, I looked at your website and your gallery and I see a lot of really fine images that I would have been proud to call my own, but they aren't any different than the ones that came before them. Indeed, probably inspired them.

Symbolism:

3 Model A's​

The photograph above was made a few months ago. It speaks to me deeply. I haven't gotten to the bottom of it. What does it represent. There's symbolism there that I haven't unearthed yet. Like the red eyes peering out of the darkness in old cartoons. Somehow it is a shunt to some deep place in my soul.

MY SOUL. To the rest of you it is very likely the dumbest bit of nothing you've ever seen and you would marvel that someone would go to the bother to make it.

And so photography and personal expression goes.

Jim, Thanks for sharing this about your journey...I really enjoyed reading of your own experiences...I wish you well and look forward to further discussion on this...

 

[Andy K]

Art or craft? Since you ask, I'd have to say craft - a quite startling level of craft skill in a highly impractical medium - how on earth you make a sand painting permanent, I can't begin to imagine! The level of artistic expression for me - and I can only speak for myself - is at greetings card level, but the woman is obviously talented and I would like to have an opportunity to see more of her work in other media (if she has any) which has perhaps been produced in a slower and more considered way.

I actually think that what she does is an even combination of art and craft. Just because a creation is transient, does not mean it is not art. Native Americans create sand art, it is not permanent but it is still art. Dance is transient, you cannot make it permanent, but while you experience it, it is art.
In fact I think she embodies what Donald is talking about. While she works what you see is pure artistic expression. Whether it is at 'greetings card' level is immaterial, it is artistic expression.

 

[Donald Miller]

I was hoping that more of us would be comfortable in sharing our thoughts and our considerations like Jim Galli did...also I thought that Gordon posted some excellent thoughts earlier...

What has transpired for each of you personally in this vein? Have you thought about this? If not, what are your thoughts personally? If it is involved with your photography, how does it manifest itself in your work and how does it impact upon you?

There is no right or wrong...There is only our own personal experience. This is about creative expression and how and why creativity manifests itself for us individually.

 

[David Brown]

There is no right or wrong...There is only our own personal experience.

That's what makes it difficult, if not impossible (for some) to talk about it.

 

[gr82bart]

i usually say exactly that while in the bathroom...but not usually in the shower.

LMAO! You guys are cracking me up.

Art.