Tuesday, April 14, 2009

Quandry

Yes, that's right, I am in a quandry. Whatever will I wear for National Tea Bagging Day? I wonder if it's too late to get hold of one of those cute little French Maid outfits. Well, if worse comes to worse, I can just wear my birthday suit!

FYI: If you didn't already know, this is 'tea bagging'.

12 comments:

WM said...

WHAHAHAHAHAHAHA! WTF? This is hysterical and I will get back to in a bit...Bill wants the computer now to figure out if we can get back some of those represented taxes...I think you should go with the French Maid outfit! It just sucks that I finally got rid of my 1700's British Highwayman's costume...dang!

Catch ya later sweetie...WM

WM said...

Okay...its just me and me and I am going to try and do this in a somewhat reasonable fashion.

BTW...Thanks so much for the teabagging link...I now have THAT image in my brain while I try to sort this out. I will try very hard to concentrate.

I am going to start with the assumption that you consider any commissioned, illustrative or advertising work as crude and that the artist is a whore. So we go from there.

To me, art is a history of our existence, good, bad, indifferent. Without it we would not have a lot of historical information. So even the least of artists can tell us much about ourselves and our past. It is often a form of documentation.

The cave painters of Lascaux were telling us about their world...high art or crude? The people that constructed the amazing clay guards for the chinese tomb were giving a glimpse of their world...high or crude? The American Indians that painted the stories of battles on hides were telling about their finest moments in battle...high or crude? The Sistene Chapel ceiling...commisioned by a pope...high or crude? The Night Watch by Rembrandt depicting all of the noteworthy people of city...high or crude?

I will paraphrase Wayne Thiebaud when he said that anyone can can make art...the tough part is being good at it.

I think it is a bit pompous of you PMT to stand on your soapbox and denounce work that was commissioned by a patron as something less for its very commissioning. I think that one of the first things you have to look at is the technical ability of the artist and did he/she accomplish what they set out to do. It is naive to make less of a work for its patronage. Artists are important and superfluous at the same time. Art is an extra plus in the scheme of things, not a necessity but necessary on many levels.

Human beings seem to need various ways of expressing themselves creatively whether it be with music, writing or visually. Making it your life's work and being able to exist financially is always problematical...so god bless patrons. We all would like one.

I think that one of the words you want to use is HONESTY...Is the artist being honest with themselves and are they performing to the best of their ability, are they learning and growing throughout their lives? A painting is not less because it was commissioned and meant to show off the patron. Did the artist do their best to use all the creative tools that they had to do the painting? Can the painting stand on its own? Does it move you or do you react to it on an emotional level? If not, then maybe the painting is not successful, no matter how competently it is painted.Regardless of the subject matter, or the original intent...if the painting has an effect on the viewer, then perhaps it has achieved its goal.

Patronnage, historicaly has allowed artists many freedoms to create what they wouldn't otherwise have had the oppotunity to. Bernini, whose patron was primarily the Catholic Church, used his great talent in creating amazing altar pieces and ethereal creations for his patron...perhaps without the church his subject matter would have been different but maybe not better and we might have been deprived of this great talent. The same could be said for any number of artists whose work could not have existed without powerful patronnage.

I personally think that a lot of the "art" that goes on today to shock the public and work that is done with an eye to profit and not done with honesty is crude. Putting a vacuum cleaner in a plastic box and calling it art is trash and crude. But the public is willing to duped when someone of reputation tells them that this is art.

I tend to look more towards artists that are moving in new directions and finding honest ways to express themselves. Warhol was an innovator and defined our capitalistic society. Pop Art became a movement that was highly representative of the times...it was new and fresh and often funny. Each defining "movement" came about because artists were looking to break away form whatever was happening at the time and to discover new ways to to create images of what they found interesting.

The Impressionists took their work out of the studio to make it more real...and trust me, there are a lot of bad paintings with that group...but people buy them and cherish them regardless, becuase it is a Monet, Manet,Sisely...etc...not because it was well done.

To try and wrap this this wander up...yes, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, no, just because it is a commissioned work does not make it any less "high" art or less "pure"...We can value a piece of art because it moves us, it charms us, it leaves us with a sense of awe. Even a simple drawing beautifully executed can be "high" art if the artist was being honest with themselves and making the best art they can whatever the circumstances. Making beauty or ugliness in art is just a way for the artist to reach out and say something about what is important to them...

CA draws things that she likes and has a natural ability to chose the colors and images that please her. In looking at her art you find the pleasure in the image that she had in creating it...that, my friend is "high" art. She has shared a bit of herself with you.

There will always be people that in looking at various forms of art will not understand it. They do not relate to anything that may make them uncomfortable...but even Picasso loved to play tricks on people who bought his art for the signature. His favorite joke was to show a dealer a group of unsigned paintings from a new and emerging artist that he had found...offering the paintings at rock bottom prices to the dealer...when the offer was turned down, he then informed the dealer that the the paintings were his...and now not for sale.

Now, before my computer refuses to post this I must hit publish...besides, this shepherd get-up is starting to itch...

There might possibly be more...but this is it for now.

à bientot...WM

Jeannie said...

I am confused which day or link to respond to. Wolfmom, is this your private link for the "teabagging" session? Just kidding, but it is confusing to know where to respond. Just a thought from a "newbie". I linked on the other link that had more responses as from when I checked it earlier.

WM said...

Jeannie...I know it is confusing...I think we check back and forth to see what is happening as PMT just keeps pushing forward as the thought occurs to him...a bit weird, but just check upwards...BTW...I forgot to mention that I really do like the name of of your boat...actually kind of classy and definitely not stupid...If I saw it it would make me stop and think.

Just never knew that "teabagging" was what it was called...see...ya learn something new every day...and I thought I had read all those books...Dang! ;o) WM

Auntie Naomi said...

Jeannie,
Respond wherever you think it is most appropriate. As you have discerned, it is more or less a free-for-all around here. I am sorry that it is that way, but Blogger is not a BBS. On the contrary, it is pretty much of a stream of consciousness kind of thing.
On the bright side, there is not the kind of volume here that there is around the corner so it is not too difficult to check the various posts for new comments.

Jeannie said...

Just conductive critisism...I don't know where to post. PMT, can you start a new day so I know where I am? This is for all you semi-veggies out there. I made this for a side dish and it was "raved" on.

Beet salad:
Roast some fresh beets, either in the oven at low-med temps or on the grill for about 30 min. Submerge the beets in warm water to peel the skins. Rinse some fresh spinach. Peel the skin off the beets and slice. Dressing: two necatarine's (oranges don't work) juices, one tbslpn honey, olive oil and one shallot minced fine. Combine with a whisk with a little salt & pepper. Pour the dressing over fresh spinach leaves and the cooled beets; top with candied pecans. (to candy pecans, brown them in a dry frying pan with a little brown sugar and butter until you smell them I add a touch of grated nutmeg). Toss and serve. The best part of the salad though is adding crubled bleu cheese on top. For the vegans in your life that are truly vegans, flaunt it. As that is the kicker. Wolfmom, thanks for the good soup recipe...It is coming to my table not in the too distant future.

WM said...

Jeannie....num num num...I absolutely love roasted beets. I think that salad is happening very soon. You must be an especially good cook...I think that the spinach/beet combo is unusal and I would think stunning with the dark green spinach and purple of the beets. I can taste that in my head. I have a savory pecan recipe that I do at the holidays...I put single malt Scotish whiskey in with the butter and spices...addictive.

Did you ever work in a restaurant or attend a cooking school? Your two recipes, so far, have a sophistication of flavors that is interesting...I think that salad would be perfect for a company dinner. A friend and I get together every so often to cook really complex meals that need lots of prep work...more than would be comfortable on one's own...we always have a great time and the dinner is always terrific. Of course, we have to get a bottle of wine open while we read through the recipes and set up a timetable for everything and divide up who does what...we save the really good wine for dinner. ;o)

I can definitely enjoy talking food with you...you seem very knowledgeble.

Cheers, WM

Jeannie said...

Wolfmom, what you are missing in de-coding this recipe is the dressing....it makes the salad. Tangerine juice, olive oil, shallots, nutmeg....I have never had any formal training but love to blend flavors together. Remind me someday to share my "summer" salad of fresh spinach leaves, pears, asiago cheese and candied walnuts with a fresh raspberry/balsamic dressing.

To be really honest, I would love to be a caterer...I am an okay cook. I know you think I might look all these recipes up, and I do. I just put my own "spin" on them.

I rarely follow a recipe.

Jeannie said...

Wolfmom and Clearayes, you have your art and I guess in a weird way I do to albeit food prep. Oh, that and I can remember numbers which drives me absolutely crazy when trying to sleep. Hence, Padmasana...

BTW, did it disturb any of you guys that I knew what "teabagging" was all about. Not gonna tell you how I know that....just yet.

WM said...

Jeannie...I consider cooking highly creative. I only got my art back full time about 2 1/2 years ago...In the meantime I did other creative things...cooking was the main thing. I read through a lot of cookbooks, but, like you, I use them as starting places. Tasting food in your mind is, I think, one of the things that makes a good intuitive cook. If you can't do that, then no matter how well you can follow a recipe, you can't make those adjustments that take a dish from standard to exceptional.

As to the teabagging thing...you have to remember that I came of age in the era of "free love"...lots of great experiences...plus I read a lot...just never heard that particular term. Of course now that I have, I had a really difficult time not laughing hysterically every time Rachel Maddow use it on her show tonight.

You are definitely a night owl...I think you are about 2 hours ahead of us. I'm usually up until about midnight or a bit later...all those eastcoasters are already tucked up in bed.

Have a good evening...I will move up to the next blog tomorrow, unless PMT has posted a new one...sometimes we just skip one if he has a lot of ideas for the day.

It's about 11:30 and time for my pre-bed latte...Cheers. WM

Auntie Naomi said...

Well, Clear Ayes already dubbed last week's super long post around the corner PMT's Epistle to the Romans, so I guess that makes this one my Epistle to the Ephesians.

Here goes ....


"I am going to start with the assumption that you consider any commissioned, illustrative or advertising work as crude and that the artist is a whore. So we go from there."

This is an erroneous assumption. Yet, I cannot fault you for it. I should have chosen a better word than 'crude'. That being said, I do feel that I made it abundantly clear that I was attempting to draw some distinction between 'High Art' and 'propaganda'. I was, in no way, attempting to disparage any particular artist, not even Rubens. As I made clear, it is quite possible that the man was simply an idiot and not the whore that he appears to have been. I do not consider all works of art, that are anything other than 'High Art', to be crude i.e. lacking technical refinement. I also do not feel that 'High Art' need necessarily exhibit technical refinement. The real question is just what I said it is: Does the message (the purported truth) of the work gel with what we know to be reality i.e factual? This is a tricky question. What is truth? As I said, perhaps Rubens actually believed that Catherine de Medici was semi-divine. Who knows?

"To me, art is a history of our existence, good, bad, indifferent. Without it we would not have a lot of historical information. So even the least of artists can tell us much about ourselves and our past. It is often a form of documentation."
And thank goodness for it!
Again, I was not attempting to define 'art', merely attempting to differentiate 'High Art' from propaganda.

"The cave painters of Lascaux were telling us about their world...high art or crude?"
Given my inclination to assume their lack of guile, I would say 'High Art'.

"The people that constructed the amazing clay guards for the Chinese tomb were giving a glimpse of their world...high or crude?"
This would be a case wherein we would have to absolve the actual artisans of any labeling. The works themselves, being propagandistic in nature, I would call them 'Not High Art' (as you can see, I am avoiding the use of the word 'crude' due to its technical implications).

"The American Indians that painted the stories of battles on hides were telling about their finest moments in battle...high or crude?"
It is hard to be sure of their exact intentions. However, theirs was an oral culture so I suspect that their paintings likely would fall into the same boat as the French cave paintings.

"The Sistine Chapel ceiling...commissioned by a pope...high or crude?"
Clear Ayes cited this example. I would say that Michelangelo should be absolved of any duplicity (assuming he was forced to create it) in the creation of this blatantly propagandistic work.

"The Night Watch by Rembrandt depicting all of the noteworthy people of city...high or crude?"
The simple fact that the people from the Society Pages were present pretty much says it all.

"I think that one of the first things you have to look at is the technical ability of the artist"
Not when it comes to 'High Art'. Again, I was attempting to distinguish 'purported' high art from propaganda. Let's forget about the Sistine Chapel or Rembrandt for a minute and ask ourselves how art is affecting us today. If one needs an example of the pernicious aspect of art, one only needs to look at an ad for General Electric. These assholes spare no expense when it comes to their television commercials. Their commercials always reflect the 'state of the art' when it comes to their production values. The technical ability of the artists who make them is second to none and they always give you that warm, fuzzy feeling. Yet, these sinister bastards have the unmitigated audacity to claim to "Bring Good Things To Life!" while they are the ones who made the atomic bombs. The same thing can be said for Dupont, Archer Daniels Midland or any number of others. Generally speaking, the more expensive the ad, the bigger the lie.

"Art is an extra plus in the scheme of things"
I disagree, art is a necessity ... whether people know it or not!

"Human beings seem to need various ways of expressing themselves creatively whether it be with music, writing or visually. Making it your life's work and being able to exist financially is always problematical...so god bless patrons."
I understand that fully. One of the reason I was so quick to respond to Lemonade's query was that I have given this subject a lot of thought over many years. I recall an interview with Chuck Mangione back in the 80's wherein he did not renounce his popular success in the face of criticism from the jazz elite. He had recently had great success with both his Feels So Good album and his single that was commissioned for the Olympics. In the interview, he refused to apologize for his 'pop' leanings. He said something to the effect of, "Why should I apologize for wanting to eat? Those records bought me a house and put my daughters through college." How could one fault the man? I, being more or less penniless at the time, was not about to.

Honesty is a fair word to bring up, but I think I already did that. I used 'sincerity'. That's the same thing, isn't it?
I addressed the sincerity of commercial artists in a response to Lemonade.

"Does it move you or do you react to it on an emotional level? If not, then maybe the painting is not successful, no matter how competently it is painted.Regardless of the subject matter, or the original intent...if the painting has an effect on the viewer, then perhaps it has achieved its goal."
Exactly! If it does not produce a reaction in the observer then the artist is wasting his/her time. Yet, the question remains: Is the reaction a calculated one based upon the cynicism of a benefactor?

"Bernini, whose patron was primarily the Catholic Church, used his great talent in creating amazing altar ... "
Did you choose Bernini because I had previously referenced him C.C.'s blog? I recall that you recently mentioned some long trek through France that you went went on to see a particular work of art. It reminded me of my trek to see Bernini's The Ecstasy of St. Theresa. It is located in a small church in Rome that is out of the way and most people miss it. Similarly, I made long excursion from Madrid to Toledo with the express purpose of seeing El Greco's The Burial of the Count of Orgaz.

"I tend to look more towards artists that are moving in new directions and finding honest ways to express themselves."
Can you say 'Modern Jazz'? I knew you could.

"Even a simple drawing beautifully executed can be "high" art if the artist was being honest with themselves and making the best art they can whatever the circumstances."
I agree. I have ever been fascinated by a simple, hypnotic melody.

Jeannie said...

Lost, confused and lonely. Story of my life.