I think that portrait painters that specialize in it, and does not
use a camera for help,
eventually become recognize for it's aesthetic style rather than the
quality of the likeness.
mando
On Dec 5, 2009, at 5:23 PM, William Conger wrote:
More dumb. I don't care what portrait painters do. They're not
interested in art unless they put art first and that means would
consider the portrait an engagement with what is possible as art
and that would be the metaphor for the "remarkable
characterization". The problem of art is not a matter of
subject. Put subject first and you put art second, or third, or
somewhere down the line of irrelevance. Just like the USSR art and
the Nazi art you like so much. You think subject is primary.
That's the position of philistines.
Outside the box? You mean I should be out there among the
barbarians who don't know anything about art or art history and
painting and the contemporary world of culture? The box I reside
in is a sprawling castle. You can huddle around your bonfire in the
frosty woods.
wc
----- Original Message ----
From: Chris Miller <[email protected]>
To: [email protected]
Sent: Sat, December 5, 2009 11:21:03 AM
Subject: Re: Contemporary Portraits
It's marginalized because for the 'professional portrait painter"
making an
artwork, as something engaged in figuring out what's possible as
art now, is
not the primary goal. The primary goal is to paint a satisfactory
likeness
of
the client. Usually it's the only goal. (WC)
Or, perhaps the goal is to make a remarkable characterization of
the client.
Many other kinds of representative goals may be involved as well --
that are
much more
interesting than merely the "satisfactory likeness" by which you
minimize and
disparage the profession.
So, the task is not about art. That reverses your analogy" the real
plumbers are those who try to make art as
their first goal and the others are just using the form of art to
practice a
craft.
That's 'art' as far as contemporary institutions of art are concerned.
You need to see outside that box.
You've not made a big discovery of another conspiracy by museums
to avoid
your bias. The fact is that a lot of stuff made as if it were art
is not art.
It doesn't even engage the issues.
I've never used the word 'conspiracy' because I don't think it
applies.
No conspiracy is involved when Hindu priests refuse to display
Christian
statuary in their churches. It's just that the statues of Jesus
and Mary do
not engage the issues that concern them.
____________________________________________________________
Diet Help
Cheap Diet Help Tips. Click here.
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/c?
cp=xfjl7fi5rKMR5kn3sJmFFAAAJz6c
l_zTaptgNR5c8Mer1v9kAAYAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAADNAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAYQAAAAA
A=
