Simply put, All artists are mere illustrators of their own views
mando
On Sep 11, 2008, at 11:31 AM, William Conger wrote:
Nothing can be said to be art categorically. That means that
illustration may or may not be taken as art. But we still need to
distinguish the common idea of illustration. Generally, what we
have in mind with the term is descriptive function. An
illustration shows something in another form but aims to clarify
its facts. An illustration of a fence would portray the facts of
that fence. Conversely, a commonly held idea of art is the
opposite of illustration. An artwork purports to show something in
another form (since all images evoke something absent) but
symbolizes facts, thus magnifying their ambiguity (levels and types
of meaning or interpretation).
Some images are illustrations and also function as high art. Many
manuscript illuminations of the medieval era would be examples. But
they were intended to be both literal, factual, and ambigiously
symbolic.
Lots of advertising images are illustrations because they are meant
to convey specific, factual features and benefits of particular
objects. Some advertising art is aimed at symbolic function, too,
as if to suggest that product features enhance broader social and
aspirational, moral and ethical values when in fact no object can
do that except through symbolism (allusion and metaphor).
In popular usage, illustration has different aims than art because
illustration is centered on an object, or factual imitation, and
art is centered on feelings and ideas.
Rockwell was an illustrator but his work frequently engaged in
symbolic issues (social codes and moral assumptions) and thus we
are sometimes urged to think of it in commonly held art terms. He
was at the edge, if there is one, separating the aims of
illustration from the aims of art. However, again, there are no
separations anymore distinguishing art from anything else so it
really is a non-issue to worry about "mere" illustration vs art.
Nowadays, there's only great art and mere art. Or, only great
notions of art in collective opinion and mere notions of art in
collective opinion (which are also the same as individual opinion).
Ontic-phontic, it makes no difference whether a notion is
classified as in the mind or in the world. They are the same since
we can't avoid thinking as if all notions were ontic.
WC
--- On Thu, 9/11/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: "What IS xxx?" "IS xxx a yyy?"
To: [email protected]
Date: Thursday, September 11, 2008, 12:42 PM
In a message dated 9/11/08 12:24:06 PM,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Unless you can share some more quotes from the
interview, Cheerskep, we
must
conclude that you are only assuming that " Sendak
deludedly believes there
"exist" two distinct "real", ontic
categories of visual creators -- artists
and illustrators -- and he himself classifies
illustrators as "mere"."
Which is the kind of assumption you often make as you
interrupt a
conversation
to begin flogging the dead horse you've dragged in
for that very purpose.
When you say. . .
"Unless you can share some more quotes from the
interview, Cheerskep, we must
conclude that you are only assuming that " Sendak
deludedly believes there
"exist" two distinct "real", ontic
categories of visual creators -- artists and
illustrators -- and he himself classifies illustrators as
"mere"."
. . .which aspect, Chris, are you merely pretending to
doubt I had evidence
for and thus am "assuming"?
That he refers to himself as a "mere
illustrator"? He was quoted in the Times
as saying that, with quotation marks around the utterance,
and I put quotes
around them in my posting.
That he believes there are two separate classes of visual
creators --
"artists" and "illustrators"? When the
Times reporter put the question to him, "Which
are you?" he didn't reject the dichotomy, he chose
one, implying he indeed
believes there are two distinct, existent classes.
That it's a deluded belief? But that's what this
thread has been all about,
Chris. I think I've been making my argument at my usual
tedious length. I don't
whether to be dismayed or comforted that you haven't
noticed at all.
**************
Psssst...Have you heard the news? There's a new fashion
blog,
plus the latest fall trends and hair styles at
StyleList.com.
(http://www.stylelist.com/trends?ncid=aolsty00050000000014)
