Apparent Confusion about Artistic Expression

[David H. Bebbington]

But isn't that the purpose of art, to provoke a reaction in the viewer? It does not say anywhere that that reaction has to be positive.
I could say the same for the millions the Saatchis have wasted on crap from Emin and Hurst.

But at least Charles Saatchi got some concrete artworks for his money - notwithstanding that you may not like them (I do). Of course some artists are willing to do ANYTHING to get a reaction, but there's a very clear law of diminishing returns. I feel the role of the MODERN artist (20th century to roughly 1945) was to be shocking, in the post-modern era, when all rules have been broken and some have been virtually obliterated, I am more looking to artists to be shamans or providers of spiritual guidance and inspiration.

I think personally I got over a desire to shock as the result of observing what I call the penis syndrome in the 1960s, by which any art student too lazy to have done any serious work during his course could at the last minute produce some images or representations of penises in the sure knowledge that someone would object, allowing the said student to pose as a persecuted genius and enjoy a "succès de scandale." This cheap trick soon wore very threadbare.

Just to pick up on a couple of points by Art:

1) I sincerely hope the money was fake. Any artist who has £1 million and can't think of a wondrous project to do should give up pronto!

2) Publicity/art/fame. I think this was the area in which Andy Warhol made his strongest statement. In the 1960s, I though Warhol was just a user of other people, on returning to his work lately I really feel he has something very interesting to say - dealing with questions such as: Is the purpose of art to be famous? Is being a celebrity an art form? Is being famous a heightened form of existence? In the light of recent developments (not least, reality TV shows), I am beginning to regard Warhol as a prophetic genius!

Regards,

David

 

[blansky]

Back to the Buddhist sand paintings, As that was really what I was referring to and not necessarily the lady in the site Andy directed us to, although that was pretty cool.

Religious art, was in many Christian cases commissioned by the Church and paid for many a famous artist to survive. I don't really see any great "devotion" in that work per se. Granted there many artisans who created work for their respective religions that probably were a devotion. But I don't see where that is a point one way or the other.

The argument that art must have "permanence" to be classed as art I don't see as valid. Or that it must be available to the world to experience. The intimacy of the Buddhist painter's work is more of a artistic "happening" and emotional experience and I would argue has more impact than most art I've seen.

The Buddhist sand painter creates an artistic experience for themselves and for their audience that is rather unique. You experience the artistry and craftsmanship and when the work is completed it is returned back whence it came. This is in direct relationship with their belief that nothing has permanence and everything is in a state of flux and change.

They also believe that one should not worship, or covet material things and that is another reason they "set it free".

I would still argue that this act of "art" is maybe the most pure and perfect manifestation of art that can be created.

Michael

 

[DBP]

In many cases, with proper documentation, governments will replace currency known to have been destroyed.

 

[Daniel_OB]

I had a discusion about art photography with some guys on phot.net. After spending hours and hours in front of keyboard at once I just figured out one guy is a professional boxer...
Veeeery nice experience. So whenever I see such discusions on internet the first think is to know who is I will spent time with. So I had a look at David's bio (an original poster) and he like hiding his photo background. Sory David but your bio invalidate all you said. What you said It is just what you think this moment and tomorow might be you will think in a different way.
It all remains me on a lawyer got a compas and ruller and discusing vonMises stresses on combined loads in press fit with professional engineers. Why art as human's activity is different. Just because camera owners call them artists.
Again, sorry david, and many other, if you wish to validate your thinking, show at first your qualifications for the same. It could be frustating spending time here and to figure out that some are "professional boxers" too and just got a camera.

I am sure there are a lot of people on APUG.ORG that can quilify for such discusions, but show it. Do not leave it as a secret or assumption.

A guy discused prints washing, here on apug.org, after all he said finished with
"I am chemical engineer with 40 yers of experience in the field, I practice photography...." Thank you very much I gotta think a lot what he said about archival washing....

www.LEICA-R.com

 

[DBP]

I can't let this one go. The forum is ethics and philosophy. Is there an educational requirement in order to have opinions about ethics or philosophy? Do we limit such discussions to certified ethicists and degreed philosophers? What are the requirements to become one? Can we guarantee that such people will be ethical?

It disturbs me that you want to see credentials before evaluating whether a person is making a valid point. And it implies that you do not have the knowledge to evaluate that person's position. There are many people, especially in the arts, who have extensive expertise and do not have a piece of paper saying so.

 

[Daniel_OB]

DBP
"...It disturbs me that you want to see credentials before evaluating whether a person is making a valid point."

A agree with all of that. There is no valid education to valid opinion. And internet is for everyone. BUT it IS even and more disturbing if you read it all for hours and figure out a guy is not competetiv for such conclusions. So to make just all easier... what is wrong with that what an engineer put on end of my previous post. Anything wrong? Just validation point, high culture guy, .... Otherwise bla bla bla, just internet chat and killing time. Sorry if you you have it you will show it, if not lets skip.

www.LEICA-R.com

 

[DBP]

But in the context of what constitutes artistic expression, is there a credential that makes one's points more valid? These are not engineering questions, for which testable answers can be discerned, but matters of pure opinion.

 

[Daniel_OB]

DBP
"But in the context of what constitutes artistic expression, is there a credential that makes one's points more valid?"

If one make a clear definition what is "artistic expression" there will a clear validation point, otherwise no. And without clear definition it does not exists for it has no valid description.

And I do not say you have to sign yourself after each post, but it is polite to put yourself in your personal profile, something that will "validate" you in front of other people. Make someone you talk to know who is he spent time with. Anything wrong with this?

www.LEICA-R.com

 

[DBP]

Yes. If it is not clear from what I write that I know what I am talking about, then listing my degrees would only serve to lower the reputation of the institutions granting them. Likewise, if it is clear, then no reference to my qualifications is necessary. the only exception I see to this rule is when someone, like Photo Engineer, is declaming on the details of a process that would take way too much space to describe, and that may involve trade secrets. Only when someone asks you to trust what they are telling you without justification do credentials become important, and in that case third party verification is even more important, given the history of authoritative experts being wrong (read any history of science).

 

[Helen B]

My thoughts exactly. I'd only add that I've read quite a lot of what I'd regard as complete twaddle from people with qualifications.

Best,
Helen

 

[KenS]

I too am curious as to when 'it' becomes 'art'. I'd like to know where the line in the sand is (pun intended but not to be sarcastic).

(a little snip here)

Art,

A few years ago (after retiring after 30+ years as a Biological Photographer) I decided to answer my daughter's challenge to try for my BFA on a part time basis (free education for senior citizens here). I asked a similar question to one of my instructors during a studio class in my first semester.... basically, it was an inquiry to find out when a crafted of "art piece" became "Fine Art". I am still trying to learn to accept as "Art" a majority of students'... and some faculty members', contemporary artworks I have seen during this period of time.

To "some degree" (no pun intended), I am still trying to appreciate the one word answer my curious mind received.... "Intent"

Having had to read many "Statements of Intent" I have to wonder of the statements have become a "pissing contest" between the creator of the artwork and the ability of the reader/viewer to comprehend that which the artist wrote.

Ken

 

[David H. Bebbington]

I had a discusion about art photography with some guys on phot.net. After spending hours and hours in front of keyboard at once I just figured out one guy is a professional boxer...
Veeeery nice experience. So whenever I see such discusions on internet the first think is to know who is I will spent time with. So I had a look at David's bio (an original poster) and he like hiding his photo background. Sory David but your bio invalidate all you said. What you said It is just what you think this moment and tomorow might be you will think in a different way.
It all remains me on a lawyer got a compas and ruller and discusing vonMises stresses on combined loads in press fit with professional engineers. Why art as human's activity is different. Just because camera owners call them artists.
Again, sorry david, and many other, if you wish to validate your thinking, show at first your qualifications for the same. It could be frustating spending time here and to figure out that some are "professional boxers" too and just got a camera.

I am sure there are a lot of people on APUG.ORG that can quilify for such discusions, but show it. Do not leave it as a secret or assumption.

A guy discused prints washing, here on apug.org, after all he said finished with
"I am chemical engineer with 40 yers of experience in the field, I practice photography...." Thank you very much I gotta think a lot what he said about archival washing....

www.LEICA-R.com

I seem to be the "David" you mean. Assuming this is the case, and if you are REALLY interested, my background is as follows: I worked in the photographic industry for 7 years as a young man, mainly as a staff photographer in studios. For my last 2 years in the business, I was a technical writer for Ilford Limited, writing booklets, advertising material, etc. I am professionally qualified in photography (I am an Associate of the British Institute of Professional Photography). In the 30 years since then, I have worked as a freelance author, translator and editor. Mainly while a student, but also occasionally since, I have also worked as an actor (amateur and fringe theater), but I gave up any idea of becoming a professional actor when I had a motorcycle accident in 1969 (can't dance any more!). In recent years, for quite a while I was a member (and Vice-Chairman) of a local voluntary arts board called Thanet Arts Council and had the opportunity for 8 or 9 years to curate an annual contemporary photography show (usual entry around 250 pictures, selected down to 65 or so). I also give on average 3 or 4 lectures a year on contemporary photography and write articles very occasionally for "Amateur Photographer" magazine here in the UK.

Does this give me a basis on which to make any meaningful statements about the artistic process? I think it does. Am I "professionally qualified" to do so? Strictly speaking, my paper qualification relates to industrial photography and not fine art, so you tell me! Does my background make me superior to anyone else, either on APUG or elsewhere? Absolutely not, as I have emphasized repeatedly in my postings. Furthermore, it is always necessary to observe a certain etiquette on bulletin boards such as APUG, where most contributors are amateur enthusiasts (in some cases with a huge fund of knowledge and experience) while others are pros. This is why I "hide" my background. Those who are really interested can view all my postings and will find that in a very early posting, I introduced myself and explained the above. If on the other hand I began every posting with "As a trained professional photographer and someone with 40 years' experience in numerous creative roles ..." I would rightly be regarded as a complete PIA.

Finally, just out of curiosity, Daniel_OB - what is YOUR background?

Best regards,

David

 

[Andy K]

My thoughts exactly. I'd only add that I've read quite a lot of what I'd regard as complete twaddle from people with qualifications.

Best,
Helen

Hear hear!

 

[roteague]

If on the other hand I began every posting with "As a trained professional photographer and someone with 40 years' experience in numerous creative roles ..." I would rightly be regarded as a complete PIA.

David,

I never knew much about your background, but I always found that your writing makes a lot of sense, and I appreciate your thoughts on various subjects here on APUG.

 

[removed account4]

I had a discusion about art photography with some guys on phot.net. After spending hours and hours in front of keyboard at once I just figured out one guy is a professional boxer...

whether he is a professional boxer, or a $5K/day pro, if he has a genuine interest in the topic you were discussing, isn't that enough?


if you would like a copy of my resume, i would be happy to furnish you with one

--john

 

[Ray Heath]

well said David, and none of us should need to post our credentials, what we do, say and present will tell more than any 'rating'

i actually prefer to see a posters' images and then decide wether their postings have validity, unfortunately on this site posting images is not a high priority, so how am i to 'believe' comparitive postings when no examples are given

why are their many who post lots of words but few images? this is a visual medium after all

 

[mark]

Because images posted on the net often do not look anything like the original. Get in on the exchanges or try to get on the list for the portfolio, that is what a lot of us do to see what others are doing in real life. Some day I will get on the portfolio list (when i feel worthy of course)

 

[Ray Heath]

sorry mark, i've heard that excuse before and it's not a good one, print quality is not the only determinant of image quality

 

[mark]

Hmmm...Excuse?

 

[Ray Heath]

oh, sorry Mark,
excuse, it's an English word, it has various uses, in my post i used it to mean forgive, condone, overlook, disregard, to justify, and to release from an obligation or duty

 

[Markok765]

oh, sorry Mark,
excuse, it's an English word, it has various uses, in my post i used it to mean forgive, condone, overlook, disregard, to justify, and to release from an obligation or duty

Yup, look at a dictionary.

 

[Daniel_OB]

David H. Bebbington

In my post I left name "David" which addresses to original poster, not to you. It is left as that intentionally so it is confusible. David could be just any David. So you see where missinformation goes, and I do not like them, especialy on internet. And thank you for that information you posted, it is impressive and I will not skip your posts. That is how it should go. Do not make youself anonimous and non existant person. Would you get book with no autor name with only 20 pages go home and read it for hours, and than say, hm garbage. I do not think so. How about your time. Than think about time of other too. Again thank you for your infos.

This long post req. hours and hours to go through. With who?

To David origal poster: I do not wish to push you down, it is bad, rude,... If one do not like just quit and go where you like. But I went to your site because I had in my mind you are good phtographer, and your pictures shows you are. But your bio do not say just anything about you as photographer, so plese, if nothing more, regard on time of other. I am sure you have something to say about David photographer.

I hope thinks like this will get better in future and it has foundation for it.

www.LEICA-R.com

 

[David A. Goldfarb]

The original poster in this thread is Donald Miller. Was your post addressed to him?

Just curious, being one of the many and various Davids around here--could be any David in fact. If you lump all the Davids and Donalds into one big pile, the Daniels won't be too far behind, and then there will just be three piles--the Davids/Donalds/Daniels, the JMoores, and everyone else.

 

[mark]

Whatever, You asked I told you. No EXCUSE was given.

 

[Andy K]

It seems to me that English may not be daniel's first language, so how about a little latitude people?