and what do you do to earn it Sent from my iPhone 646 528 8537
On Nov 4, 2009, at 4:26 PM, "armando baeza" <[email protected]> wrote: > My response was meant for Congers, But you got it, that's fine. > Entitlements are earned not won. > mando > > On Nov 4, 2009, at 1:21 PM, Saul Ostrow wrote: > >> You are entitled to whatever it is you are entitled to - >> entitlement though is >> not always a good thing - I do not think I'm entitled to my opinion >> - I think >> Ihave won my right to it >> >> >> On 11/4/09 4:10 PM, "armando baeza" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> With all due respect, you are entitled to your view, and so am I. >> mando >> >> On Nov 4, 2009, at 10:33 AM, William Conger wrote: >> >>> I find it hilarious that you or anyone could so easily dismiss >>> anything by Manet, let alone one of his most admired and >>> universally recognized masterworks. When, and if, that genius >>> stumbled or "lost it" he was still well above all but a few of the >>> best artists in history. In my view, it's you who has lost it in >>> looking at Manet, and have transferred that fault to Manet. >>> wc >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ---- >>> From: armando baeza <[email protected]> >>> To: [email protected] >>> Cc: armando baeza <[email protected]> >>> Sent: Wed, November 4, 2009 12:25:33 PM >>> Subject: Re: manet >>> >>> Can happen to any human, even us. >>> mando >>> >>> On Nov 4, 2009, at 10:12 AM, William Conger wrote: >>> >>>> This is truly funny. "Manet lost it on this design." >>>> wc >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ---- >>>> From: armando baeza <[email protected]> >>>> To: [email protected] >>>> Cc: armando baeza <[email protected]> >>>> Sent: Tue, November 3, 2009 8:51:08 PM >>>> Subject: Re: manet >>>> >>>> Sorry Chris. >>>> Manet, as great as he was. lost it on this design. I think he was >>>> not >>>> satisfied with this one, yet i love the overall feeling. >>>> mando >>>> >>>> On Nov 3, 2009, at 9:05 AM, Chris Miller wrote: >>>> >>>>>> Sorry, but this line of thought is above my intellectual >>>>>> capacity of >>>>> comprehension. (Boris Shoshensky) >>>>> >>>>> That was it's intention. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> But it's only only a commonplace to note that " when certain cues >>>>> are present >>>>> in a image they (i.e. all viewers) fill >>>>> in the missing information" >>>>> >>>>> While Saul's response does not address the recognition of a >>>>> "central >>>>> organizing effect" --- which some viewers (like you, I, and >>>>> Duve) find in >>>>> 'The Bar at the Folies Bergere" , others (like Mando) apparently >>>>> do not, and >>>>> still others (like Saul and William) may find, but consider that >>>>> issue to be >>>>> highly subjective, and just one discourse among many that may be >>>>> conducted >>>>> concerning any painting. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ---------- Original Message ---------- >>>>> >>>>> ............................... >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Sorry, but this line of thought is above my intellectual >>>>> capacity of >>>>> comprehension. >>>>> Boris Shoshensky >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> From: Saul Ostrow <[email protected]> >>>>> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, >>>>> "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >>>>> Cc: William Conger <[email protected]> >>>>> Subject: Re: manet >>>>> Date: Tue, 3 Nov 2009 10:56:13 -0500 >>>>> >>>>> Someone's expectation that when certain cues are present in a >>>>> image they fill >>>>> in the missing information - consequently we see in the case of >>>>> Manet's >>>>> painting perspective where there is single organizing principle - >>>>> that as >>>>> Mando suggests the painting was painted at different times with >>>>> some >>>>> disregard >>>>> for what came before - similar to what he had done in Luncheon on >>>>> the Grass >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 11/3/09 10:40 AM, "Boris Shoshensky" >>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> What lies and in which habits? >>>>> Boris Shoshensky >>>>> >>>>> ---------- Original Message ---------- >>>>> From: Saul Ostrow <[email protected]> >>>>> To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]>, >>>>> "[email protected]" <[email protected]> >>>>> Cc: William Conger <[email protected]> >>>>> Subject: Re: manet >>>>> Date: Mon, 2 Nov 2009 14:17:04 -0500 >>>>> >>>>> And does this lie in the habits of the viewer in the case of Manet >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 11/2/09 1:16 PM, "Boris Shoshensky" >>>>> <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> "Actually I thought what I had sent along supported Williams >>>>> observation - by >>>>> demonstrating the fact that the space of the painting has no >>>>> central >>>>> organizing principle and that each section or sector has its own >>>>> logic" >>>>> >>>>> That each section or sector has its own logic doesn't prevent >>>>> composition to >>>>> have 'bridges' that create central organizing effect, without >>>>> which painting >>>>> would fall apart. >>>>> Boris Shoshensky >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> ____________________________________________________________ >>>>> Diet Help >>>>> Cheap Diet Help Tips. Click here. >>>>> http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/c? >>>>> cp=DyukY8C53vLkKj5f6OczmAAAJz6c >>>>> l_zTaptgNR5c8Mer1v9kAAYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYQAA >>>>> A >>>>> AAA= >> >> >> >> --
