tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1561642481755412634.post2716939830718358175..comments2024-02-22T10:09:37.484-03:30Comments on Painting On: Compose: An example of contentMhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12726740154167156916noreply@blogger.comBlogger8125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1561642481755412634.post-8897268018525811212009-11-19T23:38:04.059-03:302009-11-19T23:38:04.059-03:30Kelly,
You may be late coming in on the discussio...Kelly, <br />You may be late coming in on the discussion but you have certainly added to it with your insights. Your comment about the average viewing time spent on a piece of visual art is pretty depressing when compared to the attention given to other art forms. <br />I have to say that I'm guilty of not giving work its due when I am in a gallery. Part of the problem is the realization that there are so many more works there and you don't want to miss anything so you keep moving. When I buy work for my home, I look at it much more -many hours in fact. I hope that makes up for the reality of gallery viewing.Mhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12726740154167156916noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1561642481755412634.post-2264471888023407002009-11-19T20:15:27.955-03:302009-11-19T20:15:27.955-03:30A little late coming in on this but I loved how yo...A little late coming in on this but I loved how you pulled all our thoughts into a cohesive whole, with your "context" added to the content. The speculation about the ability to contain Nature is such a powerful one. I always remember that scene in Conrad's "Heart of Darkness" where the jungles of the Congo have the ultimate conquest over man and machine. One other quick thought -- somewhere I read that the average art viewer at an exhibit will spend about 3 minutes viewing, then move to the next work; while how long do we listen to a symphony or read a novel?Kelly M.https://www.blogger.com/profile/07281523503121981821noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1561642481755412634.post-12086700412235890792009-11-19T18:54:04.043-03:302009-11-19T18:54:04.043-03:30Kathy and Donna,
Thanks for the definition of abs...Kathy and Donna, <br />Thanks for the definition of abstract and non-objective/non-representational art. Now I'm clear. I would probably get a lecture on that from someone if I didn't get it straight. <br /><br />Don, <br />I hadn't planned to write the third post on content, but came across several points I had dutifully made in a class about this confusion in terms. Teachers can't leave any stone unturned. <br /><br />hwfarber,<br />I'm glad you're engaged in my content. Writing it helps me too or I wouldn't be doing it. As usual Don gave "aunified" response. Ha, good one! I'm with Don. I often type so fast that I skip spaces when I respond to posts and them it's out there.Mhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12726740154167156916noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1561642481755412634.post-6141553514658931122009-11-19T18:50:45.721-03:302009-11-19T18:50:45.721-03:30I know that Don has a great sense of humor (and is...I know that Don has a great sense of humor (and is pretty smart).hw (hallie) farberhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11636182620056350811noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1561642481755412634.post-73071280298704116442009-11-19T13:51:57.218-03:302009-11-19T13:51:57.218-03:30Your blog has given me reason to think about art t...Your blog has given me reason to think about art terms and definitions. When I saw the word "aunified" in Don's comment, I figured I'd have to consult the dictionary for a new term. (I'm not a morning person.) Thankfully, I realized it's an abstract of "a unified."<br /><br />I am learning from your blog and from the comments.hw (hallie) farberhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11636182620056350811noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1561642481755412634.post-39394212083997169152009-11-19T03:08:42.750-03:302009-11-19T03:08:42.750-03:30You certainly explained your subject matter and yo...You certainly explained your subject matter and your content very well.<br />To me, abstract means exactly that-- an abstraction or part of something-- you can still see remnants of the object or figure. Non-objective means no objects are visible-- even a little bit-- just shapes, colors, textures, lines.layershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10991288165260934778noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1561642481755412634.post-60287902389935308612009-11-19T02:23:11.971-03:302009-11-19T02:23:11.971-03:30Great post, Margaret. I love how you incorporated ...Great post, Margaret. I love how you incorporated all of our comments into the story-line, tying them together seamlessly into aunified piece.<br /><br />I had to smile at your line, "A little context will help me explain my content in the Gate painting. ". It took me right back to your original post about Subject vs. Content. In this context either the word content or subject could have worked, because as you continued on you wrote about both. Gotta love it... it's all about Kathy's 'difference of degrees'.<br /><br />-Don-Donhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17549962962379079880noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1561642481755412634.post-39536497835395768112009-11-19T01:11:00.518-03:302009-11-19T01:11:00.518-03:30Nice synthesis of ideas, Margaret! It's my und...Nice synthesis of ideas, Margaret! It's my understanding that the term "abstract" refers to imagery which departs from representational accuracy and that non-objective art (a.k.a. non-representational) is artwork that has no recognizable subject matter. It seems to be a difference of degrees.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11037549177881696434noreply@blogger.com