Applying the making of wine to the making of sculpture, to me is being
familiar with the ingredients ( form) of the human body-- then creating a
new design symbolically different that is hopefully felt as intended. but
retaing the human  universal form's presence, in our mind.

AB


On Aug 12, 2012, at 8:32 AM, Tom McCormack wrote:

> Joseph Berg's offered link of this morning leads to some pages of
surprisingly
> keen interest to those of us "aestheticians" with a nerdy turn of mind.
It's
> surprising for several reasons, not the least of which is that the passage
is
> from a book by Matt Kramer titled MAKING SENSE OF WINE. Here's an excerpt.
>
> "Complexity as a desideratum in a fine wine is not an arbitrary standard.
It
> appears that we are in fact set up to respond favorably to complexity.
Decades
> of work in experimental psychology have revealed that when people are free
to
> choose between a simple visual image and a more complex one they gravitate
to
> the complex.The same results obtain with simple and complex light patterns.
> These and other tests reveal that, over a period of time, we always seek
more
> complex stimuli. . . .Complexity is more than multiplicity. For a wine (or
a
> melody) to be truly satisfying, especially after repeated exposure, it must
> continually surprise us (uncertainty) and yet we must still be able to
grasp
> these surprises as part of a larger and pleasing pattern."
>
> Granted, there's much to question and even quarrel with in there. But I
urge
> that those points do not keep you from finding what is helpful or
encouraging
> for you. For example, I'm now finishing (I hope) a play with a great deal
of
> complexity on several levels. A strong challenge for me comes from my
> motivation to make it as accessible as I can. However, there's a part of me
> convinced that its ability to engage my ideal intended audience will depend
on
> my retaining as much of the complexity as I can. In other words, the
> exhortation Simplify! Simplify! may be exactly the wrong guide for me to
> follow strictly.
>
> FYI: Berg's link below must have no spaces in it. I found it didn't work
for
> me until I'd made sure that each line-end did not result in a space.
>
> On Aug 12, 2012, at 12:17 AM, joseph berg wrote:
>
>> "What satisfies us so fundamentally about complexity is still the subject
>> of speculation, *largely in the academic field of aesthetics*.  It appears
>> that we favor--relish might be a more descriptive, if less exact
>> term--uncertainty or lack of predictability."
>>
>>
>
http://books.google.com/books?id=aFFnTwAit1oC&pg=PA26&lpg=PA26&dq=%22largely+
>>
>
in+the+academic+field+of+aesthetics%22&source=bl&ots=AYi1cJB3Fb&sig=rK1SUZ9o0
>>
>
2xyn-ouHNAoV4oiNVA&hl=en&sa=X&ei=pS0nULDCE43riQL3iIDYBA&ved=0CDMQ6AEwAA#v=one
>>
>
page&q=%22largely%20in%20the%20academic%20field%20of%20aesthetics%22&f=false
>>
>
>
http://books.google.com/books?id=aFFnTwAit1oC&pg=PA26&lpg=PA26&dq=%22largely+
>
in+the+academic+field+of+aesthetics%22&source=bl&ots=AYi1cJB3Fb&sig=rK1SUZ9o0
>
2xynuHNAoV4oiNVA&hl=en&sa=X&ei=pS0nULDCE43riQL3iIDYBA&ved=0CDMQ6AEwAA#v=onepa
> ge&q=%22largely%20in%20the%20academic%20field%20of%20aesthetics%22&f=false

Reply via email to