Fwd: what makes a photograph art...

2005-05-06 Thread frank theriault
Hmmm.  I'll try sending this again.  I sent it this morning, but I
never got it back, it's not in the archives, and no one responded to
it (the latter not being particularly telling g):

-- Forwarded message --
From: frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: May 6, 2005 8:32 AM
Subject: Re: what makes a photograph art...
To: pentax-discuss@pdml.net


On 5/6/05, Tom Reese [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:


 art pleases the eye

Some of the most moving art I've seen (including photos) is repulsive and ugly.

 art brings order to chaos - it creates harmony

Some art seems to me to be chaotic by it's very nature (Abstract Expressionism?)

 art clarifies, intensifies or enlarges our experience of life

Some art confuses me all to hell.  Mind you, it might be argued that
such art may make ~me~ look at life differently.  I would say that art
may force or encourage or allow me to clarify, intensify or enlarge my
experience of life;  I think that such revelations may be internal to
me, but that the art is something of a catalyst.

 art has mystery, ambiguity and contradiction

Sometimes yes, sometimes no.  Some art seems pretty straightforward,
yet it may still be considered art.

 I'm interested in hearing the thoughts of the group on these
 definitions. Do you disagree with any of them?

I gotta say, while this is interesting, I'm back to my old bugaboo of
not really knowing what the hell art is (other than the old, I know
it when I see it).  It seems to be so very far beyond definition, and
for every definition or collection of definitions one can find, there
always seem to be exceptions, modifications, caveats that make the
statements, if not meaningless, then at least less than satisfactory.

That's why I continue to resist being thought of as an artist
(beyond the pretentiousness that comes with that term).  I'm a
photographer, I take photos, and if anyone wants to see some of what I
do as art, I'm fine with that.  If someone else wants to see
snapshots, I'm also good with that.

But this isn't about me.

About the all I can say about art is that it's a form of communication
that seeks to explain the world and the universe and our experience
within, in ways that may not be expressed or expressable in other
ways.  Poor definition, I know, but this morning, that's the best I
can do.

cheers,
frank

--
Sharpness is a bourgeois concept.  -Henri Cartier-Bresson


-- 
Sharpness is a bourgeois concept.  -Henri Cartier-Bresson



Re: Fwd: what makes a photograph art...

2005-05-06 Thread UncaMikey

--- frank theriault [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 About the all I can say about art is that it's a form of
 communication
 that seeks to explain the world and the universe and our experience
 within, in ways that may not be expressed or expressable in other
 ways.  Poor definition, I know, but this morning, that's the best I
 can do.

Quite good, Frank.  I like it.  But I was hoping that you would simply
edit your sig line, and say Art is a bourgeois concept. And then we
could pretend we were sitting around a table in a cafe in Paris in
1904, drinking absinthe and eagerly working on the draft of an Artists'
Manifesto.

*UncaMikey

__
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 



Re: Fwd: what makes a photograph art...

2005-05-06 Thread frank theriault
On 5/6/05, UncaMikey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 
 Quite good, Frank.  I like it.  But I was hoping that you would simply
 edit your sig line, and say Art is a bourgeois concept. And then we
 could pretend we were sitting around a table in a cafe in Paris in
 1904, drinking absinthe and eagerly working on the draft of an Artists'
 Manifesto.

To hell with drafting any manifestos.  I'd be happy to be sitting on
the Left Bank, boozing it up...

vbg

cheers,
frank


-- 
Sharpness is a bourgeois concept.  -Henri Cartier-Bresson