That's what Ingres also believed, and almost all other good artists, including the Divine Michelangelo.
WC --- On Fri, 10/24/08, armando baeza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > From: armando baeza <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Subject: Re: Envisioning > To: [email protected] > Cc: "armando baeza" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Friday, October 24, 2008, 12:13 AM > Deliberate ambiguity as " inexactness " is the way > i > use anatomy in sculpture. Because design, to me is > more important than correct anatomy. > Does that make sense to anyone else? > mando > > On Oct 23, 2008, at 9:45 PM, William Conger wrote: > > > I've said it many times that I use the word > ambiguity in its poetic > > sense, that is, to evoke the many layers of > experience. Metaphor is > > the mode of transit from one layer to another. I > don't mean > > vagueness. I think I took for granted that any sort of > ambiguity or > > metaphor is not necessarily the mark of greatness but > that its use > > is necessary to greatness (in literature). That > leaves the problem > > of discerning or conferring quality to readers-- since > quality, > > like meaning, must be external to the object. So, > finally, > > greatness is a a type of social approbation but if it > actually has > > an enciting source it is ambiguity through metaphor > (metaphor being > > a construct in some medium). Do I still have a > problem? > > WC > > > > > > --- On Thu, 10/23/08, GEOFF CREALOCK > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> From: GEOFF CREALOCK > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> Subject: Re: Envisioning > >> To: [email protected] > >> Date: Thursday, October 23, 2008, 10:33 PM > >> William: I think that you might have a problem > here. Suppose > >> you thought > >> that Lawrence Ferlinghett's novel > "Her" was > >> good fiction. And, further > >> suppose that you thought that William James wrote > excellent > >> novels. I would > >> submit that there is some particular ambiguity in > >> James' works but a lot in > >> Ferlinghetti's novel. So, it might come down > to > >> ambiguity about what and how > >> artfully the ambiguity is applied - not just is > there > >> ambiguity or not. > >> Geoff C > >> > >> > >>> From: William Conger > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>> Reply-To: [email protected] > >>> To: [email protected] > >>> Subject: Re: Envisioning > >>> Date: Thu, 23 Oct 2008 07:55:56 -0700 (PDT) > >>> > >>> Ambiguity is the answer. Plus an arresting > and highly > >> visual use of > >>> language. Great literature explores the > complexities > >> and contradictions of > >>> the human psyche in action through strongly > visualized > >> and explicit > >>> narratives. That's my off the cuff > definition. > >> Muddled, I'm sure. But if > >>> anything, great literature is great > muddlering. > >>> > >>> WC > >>> > >>> > >>> --- On Thu, 10/23/08, Chris Miller > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> > >>>> From: Chris Miller > >> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >>>> Subject: Envisioning > >>>> To: [email protected] > >>>> Date: Thursday, October 23, 2008, 9:39 AM > >>>> The more interesting question (for me, > anyway) is > >> what would > >>>> distinguish a > >>>> "pretty mundane "True > Detective" > >> kind of > >>>> thing" from a kind of story that > >>>> might have great literary merit. > >>>> > >>>> The basic story line for Clint's > >>>> "Unforgiven", for example, would > seem > >> to have > >>>> been much more promising (even if the > resulting > >> film was a > >>>> disappointment) > >>>> > >>>> My question, of course, presumes that > "great > >> literary > >>>> merit" -- as > >>>> distinguished from best seller or > box-office hit > >> -- is a > >>>> concept worth > >>>> pursuing. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > ********************************** > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> Question for Cheerskep and other writers: > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> I happened to see an ad on a web site for > Clint > >>>> Eastwood's new movie, > >>>> "Changeling" (about a 1920s > event in LA > >> in which > >>>> a woman's infant was > >>>> abducted, and when the police return the > child, > >> she > >>>> suspects it's a different > >>>> boy). The basic story line seemed like a > pretty > >> mundane > >>>> "True Detective" kind > >>>> of thing. But it still got me to > wondering: > >>>> > >>>> What is it about the kernel of a story > that hooks > >> you? How
