Misrepresented? What does that mean? Is it possible that there is something outside the work that determines the correct representation? WC
--- On Mon, 10/6/08, GEOFF CREALOCK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: GEOFF CREALOCK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Perceptual Cropping was Marks on Canvas > To: [email protected] > Date: Monday, October 6, 2008, 10:03 PM > Probably the sophistication required to identify a > misrepresented portion of > a Pollack would be greater than that required to identify > the > misrepresentation of portion of a Rembrandt. > If it's my painting, I may well feel that each mark is > of equivalent > significance. If it's my painting, someone else may > disagree. > If I were a teacher of graphic art, I would want to avoid > suggestions that > any mark was not important. The viewer's values and > expectations may differ > from those of the artist; for example, that some marks are > more important. > Who would be "right"? > Geoff C > > > >From: William Conger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Reply-To: [email protected] > >To: [email protected] > >Subject: Re: Perceptual Cropping was Marks on Canvas > >Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2008 18:59:53 -0700 (PDT) > > > >No, why? > >WC > > > > > >--- On Mon, 10/6/08, GEOFF CREALOCK > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > From: GEOFF CREALOCK > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > Subject: Re: Perceptual Cropping was Marks on > Canvas > > > To: [email protected] > > > Date: Monday, October 6, 2008, 7:42 PM > > > Could it be that all marks are equivalent has > more to do > > > with say, abstract > > > expressionism than .... other painting? > > > Geoff C > > > > > > > > > >From: William Conger > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >Reply-To: [email protected] > > > >To: [email protected] > > > >Subject: Re: Perceptual Cropping was Marks on > Canvas > > > >Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2008 16:56:34 -0700 (PDT) > > > > > > > >I'll add to my previous comment on this > by saying > > > that Hans Hofmann said > > > >that a painting should be > "finished" at any > > > stage in its development. That > > > >would reinforce the idea that all marks have > equivalent > > > importance at any > > > >point in the making of a painting as well as > when > > > it's finished. That > > > >reiterates the underlying > "tradition" in > > > modernist painting (up to Warhol, > > > >etc.) > > > >WC > > > > > > > > > > > >--- On Mon, 10/6/08, GEOFF CREALOCK > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > > From: GEOFF CREALOCK > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > Subject: Re: Perceptual Cropping was > Marks on > > > Canvas > > > > > To: [email protected] > > > > > Date: Monday, October 6, 2008, 5:09 PM > > > > > If it's true that all marks are > important, > > > can we > > > > > exrapolate that to: all > > > > > marks are of equivalent importance? > > > > > Geoff C > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >From: William Conger > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > > > >Reply-To: > [email protected] > > > > > >To: [email protected] > > > > > >Subject: Re: Perceptual Cropping > was Marks on > > > Canvas > > > > > >Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2008 11:44:42 > -0700 (PDT) > > > > > > > > > > > >Some viewers are more sophisticated > than > > > others. They > > > > > don't pay attention > > > > > >to anything that falls beyond their > > > capacities. > > > > > > > > > > > >Some people don't care about > the original > > > > > composition as many original > > > > > >artworks have been cut down, > overpainted, and > > > otherwise > > > > > altered to suit > > > > > >someone other than the artist. > Because thast > > > happens is > > > > > not reason to say > > > > > >it has no negative aesthetic > effect. > > > > > > > > > > > >Because an artist employs > assistants is no > > > reason to > > > > > say what they do is > > > > > >unimportant or of minor quality. > Does the > > > architect > > > > > regard the contractor > > > > > >and construction crew with > indifference? > > > Further, the > > > > > history of art does > > > > > >include a great many works made in > a workshop > > > setting, > > > > > not unlike any > > > > > >craft-type workshop today, say, > yacht > > > building. There > > > > > were specialists in > > > > > >all sorts of aspects of art making > and > > > sometimes these > > > > > specialists were > > > > > >more skilled than the workshop > master in > > > particular > > > > > aspects of the work. > > > > > >(Many contemporary artists employ > > > specialists. Jeff > > > > > Koons is but the most > > > > > >obvious example). > > > > > > > > > > > >Miller has no art historical > evidence for his > > > > > viewpoint. > > > > > >He has his own opinion, an > uninformed > > > opinion. > > > > > > > > > > > >He's right about one thing: My > work has
