Wiardgroup

One interesting tidbit.

If Picasso had followed konkuro's statement we would've never seen
cubism appear.

Sometimes you have to consciously (or unconsciously) alter your aim
to arrive to new and interesting things.  Serendipity indeed plays
a role.

We could discuss the aesthetics of the movement, but such discussion
would not subtract from the technique itself.  It just would state
the subjectivity of human perception.

Regards,

Bill
______________________________________________________________________
 Bill Sequeira, Ph.D.
 Principal, Axon Hillock

> From: "skuehnl" <skuehnl@yahoo.de>
> Reply-To: wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com
> Date: Wed, 20 Nov 2002 17:55:17 -0000
> To: wiardgroup@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [wiardgroup] Fwd: [AH] Re: Synth Graphics, speaking of which
> 
> Konkuro wrote:
> 
>> It takes a great deal of talent, skill and time to create
>> a painting of a person that looks like a person, and any defects in
>> such a painting will be immediately apparent to all eyes, trained
>> or untrained, because we all know what a person is supposed to look
>> like.
> 
> This is a highly offensive statement. I don't quite know what to say.
> Others with better verbal and English skills have already addressed
> this, so I will make my answer short and radical: this thinking is
> dangerous, defies communication, and can easily result in fascism.
> Your term "training" in this context is only acceptable as
> in "socialization" and communication, which is an ONGOING process of
> finding ways to meet individual and collective standards, not a
> process with an ultimately valid and static outcome.
> 
> I'm unfriendly? Yes. You say art is a form of communication, and I
> agree, but then you defy that statement with ignorance. Quoting you:
> 
>> I have never bought that argument.  There are universal constants
>> of beauty that are built into the species.  A rose is as lovely and
>> smells as sweet in the USA as in China.  A plate of dog poo would
>> likely garner a negative reaction in both locales.
> 
> Certainly constants exist, but "universal" is a gross exaggeration of
> benchmarks. For example, you obviusly don't know about the fact that
> folks from different geographic locations see different colours.
> Japanese see blue and green as the same colour!!! And I have worked
> with so called "handicapped" people who used to eat things you
> LEARNED to abhor at since infancy, but which you used to eat as well
> when you were a baby. See my point here? Please be more specific than
> lazily referring to "universal" benchmarks. Even in such a most
> general thing as sexuality there are no universal rules.
> 
>> Then why even bother to create it?  If only you can understand and
>> appreciate something you create, why bother making it real?  Why
>> not just leave it as a thought in your own mind?
> 
> Let's put this clear and honest: I'm sorry and at a loss of words for
> you poor guy if you have never enjoyed masturbation.
> 
> 
> On another note: if you already abhor at the concept of decorative
> panel graphics from the start, then why are you concerned with the
> fact that the Wiard graphics aren't symmetric????
> That's a contradiction and seems to me as if you just wanted to make
> n absolute statement at all costs.
> 
> I realize my statements may be offensive to you as well. But that's
> what you get for your gross black and white concept that everything
> that's not made the same way that Beethoven worked is just random
> nonsense. You ignor all inbetwen. At least that's what you sound like
> and I'm allergic to that.
> 
> SK
> 
> 
> 
> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
> wiardgroup-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
> 
> 
> 
> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
> 
> 
>