.

[member66170]

.

 

[sophie]

Eugh, Simon Schama. Pass.

 

[Kyriakos]

Hm, i think it can be safely assumed this will not be based on history as much as politics. Because Bbc & this moment in time.

 

[Dachs]

Eugh, Simon Schama. Pass.

but mary beard tho

 

[Kyriakos]

Mary Beard laments how everyone thinks the Greeks are super awesome

She should try presenting her program without using any greek terms. I mean surely 'history' doesn't need to be there either - it is a bbc show

 

[Dachs]

I also dont think its possible to talk about history completely apolitically.

Not only is it impossible, it is undesirable to even try.

 

[Kyriakos]

I made the point kind of badly. What she was saying is that we are culturally ingrained to see Greek-style sculptors as the defining image of "civilised" art that we subconsciously judge other art by how closely it resembles it. She thinks that is not desirable.

But honestly, each episode covers a lot of ground without the constant repetition which plagues other factual/documentary tv shows. Makes more sense to watch it then for me to (poorly) describe it here.

If that is her point, it is an absurd one. Surely sculpture by Paul Klee (eg his numerous dolls) are more important than the ridiculous nazi art which supposedly aspired to look like greek statues. Paul Klee is firmly in expressionism, so his art looks a lot less than anything greek-roman in that aspect, but still is pleasant and important because he had talent - unlike nazi stuff.

If anything, statues - and other art - make positive impression due to the human psyche, not because the observer has mental lists of how other statues look.

 

[Dachs]

If that is her point, it is an absurd one. Surely sculpture by Paul Klee (eg his numerous dolls) are more important than the ridiculous nazi art which supposedly aspired to look like greek statues. Paul Klee is firmly in expressionism, so his art looks a lot less than anything greek-roman in that aspect, but still is pleasant and important because he had talent - unlike nazi stuff.

You're reinforcing her point with that example, not arguing against it. In fact, the whole oeuvre of Arno Breker and the other classicizing Nazi-era sculptors is probably the best example of people (in this case, the Nazis) erroneously assuming that art "should" look like Hellenistic-era sculpture, and embracing derivative schlock because of it.

 

[Kyriakos]

You're reinforcing her point with that example, not arguing against it. In fact, the whole oeuvre of Arno Breker and the other classicizing Nazi-era sculptors is probably the best example of people (in this case, the Nazis) erroneously assuming that art "should" look like Hellenistic-era sculpture, and embracing derivative schlock because of it.

I think you should reflect on your conclusion. It should require no help to notice the error.

Anyway, if you still need it, i wrapped it up here:

Spoiler :

Nazi statues never gained prominence as art. If one would be meaning to claim they did in nazi Germany... yeah, in the very place where loads of important art got destroyed as "decadent". Works by Paul Klee, and greek sculptures, are very prominent, and very different to each other. They would be that with or without ww2.

Speaking of (proto)expressionism, there was 'El Greco', who, again, didn't create paintings which look like ancient greek statues. And expressionism as an art movement is - if anything - clearly centered in the germanic countries.

 

[Buster's Uncle]

I'm with Olleus and Dachs - beauty and excellence of craft in art are a matter of opinion -notwithstanding the indisputable classical Greek mastery of both- however, that example just gets in the way when evaluating, say, an Olmec head...

I'm speaking as a sculptor myself...

 

[Kyriakos]

I'm with Olleus and Dachs - beauty and excellence of craft in art are a matter of opinion -notwithstanding the indisputable classical Greek mastery of both- however, that example just gets in the way when evaluating, say, an Olmec head...

I'm speaking as a sculptor myself...

I think that what gets in the way isn't the actual statue or statues, but what those statues (eg famous ancient greek ones, or medieval italian ones at Florence) tie to in the human psyche.

Otherwise the abstract stuff (Klee is mostly abstract too) would mean nothing at all, while now they also tie to deeper emotions and mental balances.

Compare to some nazi statue, which looks like it was drawn for a cheap comic and would never be identified as important if not by the regime itself towards the regime's clowns. It's not like one could see those works and think "if only they weren't tied to the nazis... What great art!" ^^

 

[Buster's Uncle]

Well, most of the same could be said of Soviet Industrial Realism, coming from the other side, which contemporary western tastes find 1) a load of propaganda bull, and 2) too realistic, within that constraint, to be interesting/say anything much worthwhile.

It IS all a matter of opinion. Art is like that. As a good writer, you're an artist yourself, and I'm sure you can see that.

 

[Kyriakos]

Well, most of the same could be said of Soviet Industrial Realism, coming from the other side, which contemporary western tastes find 1) a load of propaganda bull, and 2) too realistic, within that constraint, to be interesting/say anything much worthwhile.

It IS all a matter of opinion. Art is like that. As a good writer, you're an artist yourself, and I'm sure you can see that.

I am not of that view at all, BU. You can even see it in art in civilization games. A good unit or graphic will be picked up as better (by the large majority of people) than a (clearly) lesser one. At some point all impressions are tied to something more common, though the type of this deeper common basis is more of a philosophical discussion (ie it isn't something itself clear). Yet it is evident that the more you move away from one or the other extreme, the less clear things become, and the closer you are to one extreme or the other (eg good and bad or various near-synonyms) the more standard the view on it becomes.

 

[Buster's Uncle]

Some modes/styles of artistic expression are naturally easier to understand/accept/enjoy for us human beings, sure, of course. My point still stands.

The Mayan statue of a dwarf grinning while he gives himself a drug enema is crude compared to the Greek Masters' work, is the point, also that it's important from not just a cultural/historical perspective -our topic- but even as pure art criticism, it ought to fairly be taken on its own merits, not compared to the irrelevant Classical tradition the Mayans never knew. Art is inherently subjective.

It's a very good piece, actually, the big grin while the li'l feller gets himself high being effective and drawing an answering smile from the viewer. You probably won't have any trouble googling it up, and its worth it.

 

[Buster's Uncle]

-Also, to answer a point more directly, game art has pretty exacting functional requirements. You know I'm a SMACX art modder myself, and they all tell me I'm very good - but that's WORKING art, not art-art. That's a moby dick issue with that stuff that confuses both the art and archeology perspectives with a poor example.

 

[Kyriakos]

Some modes/styles of artistic expression are naturally easier to understand/accept/enjoy for us human beings, sure, of course. My point still stands.

The Mayan statue of a dwarf grinning while he gives himself a drug enema is crude compared to the Greek Masters' work, is the point, also that it's important from not just a cultural/historical perspective -our topic- but even as pure art criticism, it ought to fairly be taken on its own merits, not compared to the irrelevant Classical tradition the Mayans never knew. Art is inherently subjective.

It's a very good piece, actually, the big grin while the li'l feller gets himself high being effective and drawing an answering smile from the viewer. You probably won't have any trouble googling it up, and its worth it.

If it has merit, it will get known if granted an audience. Much like fauvist or other distorted images in painting which had no trouble getting known. Also - it should go without saying - different types of art don't compete with each other. Yet if some artistic piece does cause emotions to many people, due to having a tie to things they are conscious or not of but exist in their mind, it won't matter if it looks more like ancient greek art, german expressionism, or anything other. See the popularity of some japanese paintings in 19th century Europe; other, not so good, japanese paintings, didn't make it. Given long enough scope in time, most surviving art had some merit allowing it not to be forgotten.

-Also, to answer a point more directly, game art has pretty exacting functional requirements. You know I'm a SMACX art modder myself, and they all tell me I'm very good - but that's WORKING art, not art-art. That's a moby dick issue with that stuff that confuses both the art and archeology perspectives with a poor example.

Which plays no role, given we were discussing your claim that it is all a matter of opinion. Surely one has an opinion on "working art" too, no?

 

[Buster's Uncle]

Well, you brought your game art up, I brought mine up and refuted as fish not foul and an OT example. [shrugs] You da BOMB, baby and everybody done know it, but nothin' to do wit' nothin', there. Game art has to WORK in the game even before it pleases, and it's a specialist thing not relevant to cave paintings and ancient carvings, which you'll never understand looking through a Homeric lens.

History, at the end of the day, is worthless without a) a pretty fine command of the details and overall narrative, and b) understanding the people and their ways by both their own lights and ours.

 

[Kyriakos]

Hm, ok, though i certainly am not that good a gfx artist. In fact i really have next to no actual talent in gfx art - i just learned how to model stuff, and it took years

I think it is a matter of non-conscious qualities too. I mean, with no talent, you can get up to a point - ie passable or even somewhat good. But a person with talent in a field can produce rapidly far better works. I think i have some talent as a writer, but really next to no talent as a gfx creator.

 

[Buster's Uncle]

Well, Talent is a big plus, but I've taught every competent SMACX art modder active in the last nine years I know of besides Kilkakon and including me, about six others, and yes, patience for detail, GIMP mastery, making the base fit the box and remembering the sun's always on the right trumps talent. That was precisely my point, though.



I found a different sculpture than the drug-enema dwarf I recalled, not as good but very much the same thing answering to the same description and clearer what the little mother's doing from the front. Let's see if this will display:

That face is not exactly photo-realistic, but see only the Classical Greek Masters punking it for quality, and you're not a good historian, and not even a good art critic. That there's one happy high dwarf, and I will fight on that hill.

 

[Buster's Uncle]

Hey, them Abduls are really good as far as they go w/ the no figures.

(-Nobody's going to take that as serious racist, right? Apologies in advance.)