Obscure stuff.........

fluffy · Post by **fluffy** » Thu Apr 13, 2006 9:46 am

ok.........this is a thread for the really obscure stuff that might not fit in anywhere else.............it'll be a chance to air random thoughts and post your more obscure pics and have more 'off the wall' discussions..........
If folk stick to this thread, as long as the stuff ain't too pervy, argumentative or mean, then it shouldn't be deleted and the mods won't have that awful dilema of whether or not to delete something...........

so feel free...........post your bizarre stuff here..........

for example Prince Henry (aka that little git Prince Harry

) had his marching out parade at Sandhurst yesterday..............omg!!!...to think that little Nazi uniform wearing, lap dancing loving idiot ,could potentially lead a platoon of soldiers into battle makes my blood run cold...........lol...

and this week sees 10 years since the shuttle exploded on take off..........

so get the obscure stuff posted here folks........

fluffy

quirky · Post by **quirky** » Thu Apr 13, 2006 3:39 pm

I wonder if it's going to be one of those days of late with lotsa lurkees and no postees.

Jimenem · Post by **Jimenem** » Thu Apr 13, 2006 4:40 pm

Not sure.

Have you ever wondered how limited we are by language? It doesn't matter what language you speak there are only a limited amount of ways to describe something and then to describe something acurately is truly impossible. All becasue of language.
Our thoughts are still based on language and probably always will be, so if language is limited then how we think is also limited. That could be used as a kind of controll, what if there are ideas and concepts out there that could really change the world? But they're not accessable because they can't be described by modern language. That sux. I blame oxford.

quirky · Post by **quirky** » Thu Apr 13, 2006 5:41 pm

That's why a great deal of art speaks to us.

Jimenem · Post by **Jimenem** » Thu Apr 13, 2006 5:56 pm

Art truly does attenpt to fill that void, but it's so subjective that two people could look at the same peice of art and walk away with two completely different ideas of what the painting or sculpture etc. . . meant. And idea that must be described in words by language, so who's right? or are they both wrong for even attmpting to add language meaning to the artwork?

A painting can be decribed by words, but cannot truly replace them and vice versa the words cannot truly replace the art, or add any significance to it. The significance to art, I'm afraid is found deep down in our most primitive psyche the one that looks at something pretty and says "wow that's pretty". A new idea cannot be expressed in color and style but in writing and prose, but as I've already stated we are so limited by what our language allows us to think that new ideas will soon run out.

quirky · Post by **quirky** » Thu Apr 13, 2006 6:45 pm

we are so limited by what our language allows us to think that new ideas will soon run out.

English speakers? First of all it's a newish language that is always evolving. It moves so fast that sometimes it's hard to follow.

Peeps....always used to be marshmallowy chicky candies at Easter.

In high school I do remember the battle about explaining art. I did some abstract stuff, but it was inspired by different music. I created a huge piece with jesso (sp?) and different kinds of red and black paint that was inspired by the Sex Pistols as the musical equivalent of dadaism. I mean it was 6 X 12.

I gave it to the always sober faced, known as a bit curmudgeonly vice principle. I told him it represented how students felt when called to his office. I think he hung it in his waiting area.

So, if you create art...are you obliged to explain? I think so. It's the conclusion I came to.

I built a frame of wood 6 X 12 again and from it, I hung billowy material in the colors I'd appreciated in Norway. It looked cool. But the stips of material also had different "slack" and I played the fabric from the back with a blow dryer to Grieg's "Wedding at Troldhaugen." I was totally hid, all you could see was the different material billowing at different times.

I loved my art teacher Mrs. Shackleton, but the afternoon I put up my artwork for the exhibit, she asked me if I would perform the piece for a friend of hers.

Turned out he was the head of the modern art museum in Brussels...I found out a bit later. I said, "WWWaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa....why didn't you TELL ME???" She said, "Because you wouldn't have done it."

She knew me well.

Jimenem · Post by **Jimenem** » Thu Apr 13, 2006 6:52 pm

English speakers? First of all it's a newish language that is always evolving. It moves so fast that sometimes it's hard to follow.

Any language.
I agree, however that's perspectivism, say that you're in a square room with a low ceiling. No windows or doors. . .your movement is limited in that room. The same way you are limited by language. You can raise the roof and expand the wall untill they're out of reach or can't be seen, but that doesn't mean that those limitations aren't still there. There are still ideas that exist that cannot be fathomed, due to the limitations of language. That's all I'm trying to say.

I'm under the belief that a painting can be painted with no ulterior motive that simply becuase it looks beautiful. Art especially doesn't need a meaning, but it doesn't hurt to add one, but any meaning you give your artwork or someone elses may not be realized by the next person that sees it, in fact they could get the exact opposite out of your painting than you intended.

quirky · Post by **quirky** » Thu Apr 13, 2006 7:09 pm

I respect your views, but in my exam for Art....If I had said, "I did it....it's art....questions are tds...." You know I'd have gotten a big ol F.

Then again, I have done some other artwork for people. A bowl of apples, the Christmas tree....

But I see that as a different KIND of art.

This, was just something I did on the spur of the moment for my grandmother. Why? Because it's a Christmas tree.

The performance art, however, was inspired by the movement in Grieg's music and the colors of Norway. And doing that art was very much more a journey for me than for the viewers.

Jimenem · Post by **Jimenem** » Thu Apr 13, 2006 7:12 pm

I respect your views as well.

I sense that most of your art is inspired by music??

Art inspiring art. . .what a concept.

(I like that drawing/painting by the way, didn't you post it on here before?)

quirky · Post by **quirky** » Thu Apr 13, 2006 7:50 pm

Yes....and I think the process of art should give as much release to the artist as possible.

I remember sitting up very LATE in the armchair trying to capture what I saw with oil pastels.

The end result absolutely THRILLED me.

I did a piece for my aunt and uncle of three different kinds of apples sitting in a blue bowl. (My aunt has a kitchen with the apple theme).

Grandma thought it was fascinating to watch me when I put the apples in the bowl, put the bowl on the table and just started to work with the oil pastels.

What I ended up with, surprised me more than anyone. It just came to life. I don't know HOW I do it....I really haven't had a lot of art training, but I still derive a lot of joy from translating things I see to paper.

In high school and amongst the masters, though.....you need to give an idea of whgat you wanted to convey.

Otherwise you're some jokeworthy ponce saying, "Love my art....because it IS...."

Darnit, give me some idea of what you're about...whether it's part of a movement or not.

I love Andrew Wyeth paintings. He finally gave someone on the morning news show an interview and he talked about his paintings. For me, THAT was a treat....because in MY head....the art and the artist aren't separate.

Clemmy · Post by **Clemmy** » Thu Apr 13, 2006 8:34 pm

Jimenem wrote:... two people could look at the same peice of art and walk away with two completely different ideas of what the painting or sculpture etc. . . meant. ...

It's more than language itself... people have different frames of thinking, or perspectives or mental models (there are various terminologies to the same concept)... and different backgrounds, beliefs, values that influence how we think about things and how we communicate and understand one another....

I found it fascinating how people can go beyond language... and can communicate ... Art is an expression and it sure may have different meanings to different people.... and the beauty is that these differences bring color to life!

Of course that language creates barriers.... I sometime have to look up a word or expression at the dictionary to understand what quirky means...

... but I am learning and polishing my language skills....

Jimenem · Post by **Jimenem** » Thu Apr 13, 2006 8:37 pm

It's like making little mini-comies of parts of your imagination or creativity. I too love to draw, I use pencil mostly. But if I can get one person to say "wow", then I have been fulfilled. I draw to plese not only myself, but to give other people places to go when the real world isn't working for them. Art is a wonderful (yet subjective) for of communication, if not then it's simply a release and an allowance for your creativity to frolic in merriment.

quirky · Post by **quirky** » Thu Apr 13, 2006 8:41 pm

Recently I saw the movie "Pollock". I'd been aware of him....everyone thinks of him as that guy who spatters canvases with paint.

The movie helped to explain what he was expressing with his art and I developed a whole new appreciation.

"I feel like a clam without a shell." Was one of the things said in the movie and BOY can I relate.

Jimenem · Post by **Jimenem** » Thu Apr 13, 2006 8:43 pm

Gee I wish I would've thought of it first, I'd be rich. I feel like a turtle without Taco Bell. I mean. . .ummm, . . .a shell.

Clemmy · Post by **Clemmy** » Thu Apr 13, 2006 8:48 pm

Have you seen Girl with a Pearl Earring about Dutch painter Vermeer? There is a scene in which he is in his attic with the maid and he goes to the window and asks her what colors are the clouds (or the sky)... and she sees gray... but she pays more attention and can see colors in the sky... it's a beautiful scene... it's actually a beautiful movie...