[NetBehaviour] Learn To Draw
Simon Mclennan
mitjafashion at hotmail.com
Mon Jan 16 20:59:01 CET 2012
Simon,
People value rarity-
Bartok, Beethoven and Atsushi Takenouchi - all rare - but All people
can do Butoh and can be like pole flexing in wind or crackling dry
leaf on ground - fox stretching in sun silver shadow of leaf blades
in forest glade-
to argue about value is pointless - however
we live in societies where people lack connection with earth and wind
- real life - they value mediated experience above smell of bush and
light on water - fire flickering
the structures and systems of mediation are a con to get money off
mass of people
So I agree with you
warm wishes
Simon
On 16 Jan 2012, at 18:57, Simon Biggs wrote:
> Ummm, yes - but I am not arguing that everyone is the same (which
> isn't the same as equal). We are all different. I am arguing that
> the problem is with our perception of value.
>
> best
>
> Simon
>
>
> On 16 Jan 2012, at 18:41, Simon Mclennan wrote:
>
>> I like a lot of this stuff you say Simon,
>> However, have you ever read the short story by Kurt Vonnegut
>> entitled "Harrison Bergeron", from his collection - Welcome To
>> The Monkey House.
>> I recommend it hugely. A dystopian satyrical story that made me
>> laugh when I first read it, and still does. It also made me think
>> a bit.
>>
>> http://www.tnellen.com/cybereng/harrison.html
>>
>> Simon
>>
>>
>> On 16 Jan 2012, at 17:08, Simon Biggs wrote:
>>
>>> Joel
>>>
>>> My partner discusses this a lot. She is what you would call a
>>> "gifted" dancer, by any definition, having danced with the Royal
>>> Ballet, Merce Cunningham, Rambert and many famous companies and
>>> choreographers. If she wished she could present herself as a
>>> prima ballerina, but she hates the way dancers are expected to be
>>> athletic and able to jump twice as high as other people, whilst
>>> also appearing waif-like (although she can do that and is size
>>> 0). She argues that dance is dance and we should not be addicted
>>> to this idea of the highly trained dancer. Her own choreography
>>> post-modern, denying the athletic and highly aesthetic, making
>>> works where repetition of every day activities (like standing up
>>> and sitting down or opening a door) make up a lot of the
>>> material. The point of such work is to critique traditional dance
>>> values and propose that anything can be dance (and by extension,
>>> anybody can be a dancer) and that such practices are just as
>>> valuable as any other. In this outlook, which I agree with 100%,
>>> the notion of "gifted" simply doesn't exist. Indeed, the idea of
>>> "gifted" is critiqued as part of a process of fetishisation and
>>> Fordist professionalisation of creative activities that are
>>> currently the preserve of an elite but should be in the daily
>>> life of everyone.
>>>
>>> So, in short, my response to your statement about "gifted"
>>> artists is that you are allowing your bourgeois attitudes to show
>>> (no insult intended).
>>>
>>> Read Tim Ingold on creativity as a shared social activity. He
>>> totally destroys the dominant logic of the art world and its
>>> hierarchical structures without needing to invoke political
>>> diatribe. Ingold simply writes about people and their activities
>>> after having watched them, as an anthropologist, for the last 50
>>> years. He studies societies where professional artists or sports
>>> people do not exist and he is thus able to evidence what art and
>>> sport can be about when they haven't been corrupted, as they have
>>> in our competitive and cruel society.
>>>
>>> best
>>>
>>> Simon
>>>
>>>
>>> On 16 Jan 2012, at 15:35, Joel Weishaus wrote:
>>>
>>>> Simon;
>>>>
>>>> I agree that everyone can do something--I think that's what
>>>> Beuys meant---, but I am talking about the "gifted" artist.
>>>> Just like everyone with a "normal" body can run, but very few
>>>> can reach the Olympics, no matter how hard they train.
>>>> -Joel
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: Simon Biggs
>>>> To: Joel Weishaus ; NetBehaviour for networked distributed
>>>> creativity
>>>> Sent: Monday, January 16, 2012 1:03 AM
>>>> Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] Learn To Draw
>>>>
>>>> I don't agree with the "natural talent" argument. I'm a nurture,
>>>> not nature, person. Having taught art for almost as long as I've
>>>> professionally made it (over 30 years) I've observed the
>>>> variations in ability of students. I've also observed how much
>>>> that ability is measured against fixed definitions of what is
>>>> good or bad art. Most of the time it has been those definitions
>>>> that caused the issues for the student, not their ability.
>>>> Everybody has what it takes to be an artist (Beuys was right on
>>>> that) because it is a simple twist of the human condition to
>>>> become one - and we are all human. The question is whether you
>>>> are willing to make that twist and for others to be generous
>>>> enough to recognise what you have done. That doesn't make you a
>>>> good artist - but the good vs bad argument is a separate matter.
>>>>
>>>> best
>>>>
>>>> Simon
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 16 Jan 2012, at 00:31, Joel Weishaus wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Simon;
>>>>>
>>>>> I agree with you, up to a point. And that is, in every art,
>>>>> there is always the mystery of talent. Some have it; others, no
>>>>> matter how hard they work, never will be "gifted."
>>>>>
>>>>> -Joel
>>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> From: Simon Biggs
>>>>> To: NetBehaviour for networked distributed creativity
>>>>> Sent: Sunday, January 15, 2012 10:17 AM
>>>>> Subject: Re: [NetBehaviour] Learn To Draw
>>>>>
>>>>> LOL.
>>>>>
>>>>> Learning to draw is not a technical skill, although some people
>>>>> want you to believe it is. Learning to draw, in the first
>>>>> instance, requires learning how to look at things very
>>>>> intensely and carefully, understanding line, shade, volume,
>>>>> atmospherics, etc. You can't learn that from a book. You have
>>>>> to immerse yourself in looking at things - flowers, bodies,
>>>>> trees, hills, clouds, etc. Go and look at hundreds, even
>>>>> thousands, of artists pictures, preferably for real (books
>>>>> rarely do them justice and the web is n extremely poor
>>>>> simulation). Get a sense of the relationship between what the
>>>>> artist was seeing, in their mind's eye, and their method of
>>>>> execution. Place the work in its historical and cultural
>>>>> context. Seek to understand drawing as a discursive activity,
>>>>> between the artist and the context they are working in. This is
>>>>> also very important to understanding why a drawing is what it
>>>>> is - why a Japanese line drawing is so different to a Medieval
>>>>> illustration or a Pollock. Then hang out with your peers who
>>>>> are also developing these capabilities, sharing ideas, methods,
>>>>> philosophies, etc. Practicing as an artist, as this list
>>>>> proves, is about being with others, engaged in discourse.
>>>>> Drawing is just another form of that - often enmeshed with
>>>>> other media and forms of communication, from arguing to books,
>>>>> to playing music together. It is rarely something you can do
>>>>> alone or in isolation. Expect the learning process to be long
>>>>> and slow. Many people never learn, I think mainly because they
>>>>> lack the patience to look at things long and hard enough to
>>>>> break the inertia of our normal ways of seeing things.
>>>>>
>>>>> BTW, here's a drawing my son did when he was about 8. It is
>>>>> qualitatively different to anything he had done till then. We
>>>>> were on holiday staying in a remote cottage. It rained
>>>>> very heavily all day so we couldn't go out. I asked him to look
>>>>> at the flowers for a few hours before starting the drawing and
>>>>> to then take his time with it when he did. I gave him no other
>>>>> advice or aid. It took him the whole day but evidences how he
>>>>> looked at something and translated that to paper. The main
>>>>> thing was that it looked like nothing he had done before. By
>>>>> looking long and hard he transcended himself. That's what
>>>>> drawing is about and why you can't learn it from a manual.
>>>>>
>>>>> best
>>>>>
>>>>> Simon
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Simon Biggs
>>> simon at littlepig.org.uk http://www.littlepig.org.uk/ @SimonBiggsUK
>>> skype: simonbiggsuk
>>>
>>> s.biggs at ed.ac.uk Edinburgh College of Art, University of Edinburgh
>>> http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/ http://www.elmcip.net/ http://
>>> www.movingtargets.co.uk/
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> NetBehaviour mailing list
>>> NetBehaviour at netbehaviour.org
>>> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> NetBehaviour mailing list
>> NetBehaviour at netbehaviour.org
>> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
>
>
> Simon Biggs
> simon at littlepig.org.uk http://www.littlepig.org.uk/ @SimonBiggsUK
> skype: simonbiggsuk
>
> s.biggs at ed.ac.uk Edinburgh College of Art, University of Edinburgh
> http://www.eca.ac.uk/circle/ http://www.elmcip.net/ http://
> www.movingtargets.co.uk/
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NetBehaviour mailing list
> NetBehaviour at netbehaviour.org
> http://www.netbehaviour.org/mailman/listinfo/netbehaviour
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.netbehaviour.org/pipermail/netbehaviour/attachments/20120116/63e59904/attachment.htm>
More information about the NetBehaviour
mailing list