My World: An example of Art..

Art in the truest sense of the word. Appeals to emotions, to touch and feel, to the sight, to the smell,
To the palate. Comprises all there is to know about the sciences..in all fields. Functional design. Fit for purpose. Enabled to survive. The list goes on and on. Benefits multiple organisms. Rich and poor. Without distinction. The appeal crosses the cultures and time.

No, it is not the photograph folks.

Now you show me one work of art that meets these criteria..


Or do we just keep on talking to impress ourselves and others about what is art.

Another Art form..the main one being the objects themselves and the illumination..

An Art form that, I would venture, is known to more homo sapiens than any art hanging anywhere or was shown in any gallery or open to viewing..


Honestly, tell me please, which artist's work would be more universally recognized than the objects in this image.

Take Monet, for example..an ' artist ' copying true works of Art. How many around the globe know of Monet's works?

How many around the globe know of apples and the light that streams down from..you know where?

What about the smallest living cell created out of amino acids? Art?

I think so. Of the highest order that was, is and ever shall be.

And the ' art ' we talk about. Little people ( me being the smallest of this group ) talking of little things of no consequence. When the Majesty of Art lies all around us.

To me Art is not something that hangs in a gallery. Or that, by a consensus of a few intellectual pimps, makes it to prime time.

A desert, a mountain. A specific desert. A specific mountain.

The Artist. And a man who goes up the mountain.

The work that shall live forever. Not found in galleries. But in the hearts and homes of billions across the globe.

Art for all time.

René Magritte: Le fils de l'homme

Jerome Marot said:

Click to expand...

Jerome's example of a work of art. Wonder how many know of this great work of art?

I also wonder if this is the type of art espoused by OPF and proudly representative of certain western cultures.

Jerome, why do you resent humans so much as to distort their face?

Or is it me you resent? But I generally do not wear this garb.

p.s what a waste of a good apple.

fahim mohammed said:

To me Art is not something that hangs in a gallery. Or that, by a consensus of a few intellectual pimps, makes it to prime time.

A desert, a mountain. A specific desert. A specific mountain.

The Artist. And a man who goes up the mountain.

The work that shall live forever. Not found in galleries. But in the hearts and homes of billions across the globe.

Art for all time.

Click to expand...

Fahim,

I have no issue with you declaring a use of the word art in the context of "the Creator". It works, and is a beautiful view of everything we see and appreciate. However it's just an analogy to what is made by man and bartered. The same word, but used in a different context.

I can call a person who stops to help in a car accident, an angel, but for certain, that's only true in a poetic sense, as my saying so, doesn't give the person wings to fly!

Art, here, is starts a journey from what we make of what's around us. If you see it as "not" your work, but that of God, then that's fine by me! It doesn't then, however, in itself, (just because of your designation), pay the price of admission to an art gallery or make your work worthy of my purchase.

Art is a practical term, like a spanner or screw driver, fit for a particular kind of human need. It's usually something to show others and most often it's purchased from a gallery, but one might receive it directly from the person who conceived it. Calling a rose a work of art, is merely a poetic expression, not a practical one, as anyone can grow one or pick it from a park. A work of art is made by a human or selected from nature and given special status and new meaning to become art.

Asher

Here folks is a something regarding art..

art

I have included the artist and the title; since not all of us know most of the artists; at least not me.

And as an acknowledgement to the artist to avoid copyright violation or to seem that I might have painted or taken the image posted. It is common courtesy to do such a thing. Acknowledge someone else's work; unless it is your own. OPF-TOS.

fahim mohammed said:

Here folks is a something regarding art..

art

Click to expand...

Pierre Brassau at work is really a wonderful photograph. The picture being painted is one I'd love to own. Art does not have to be created by a human, just appreciated by us enough to want it. Who cares if the provenance was a hoax. What matters is if one likes what one sees. It does not need any meaning. It can be, as here, a means of just musing or enjoying the shapes and imagining different meanings each time one visits.

We can walk by the sea shore and pick up an interesting rock or driftwood and then declare it to be art. Will it work for a gallery to buy it? Perhaps not, unless one has a name or a famous gallery declares it as "Worthy art, a great choice for collecting, sir!".

Being "commercially successful" art does not provide some objective measure of the technical mastery of composition, photographic skill or understanding color perception and so forth. It just means that the photographer is able to somehow make a picture that convinces others they possess value enough to devote wall space or hard-earned cash for it.

Often as not, such work is also of a character that others also appreciated and might compete to own and therefore a market is created.

It goes without saying that the Picasso does not overtake the rose in beauty or wonderfulness! It's just that one exists from without and the other is just a category of objects men like to preserve for posterity and that one can often buy in galleries.

Asher

fahim mohammed said:

Jerome's example of a work of art. Wonder how many know of this great work of art?

Click to expand...

Hi Asher,

I like most of René Magritte's work. Many of his paintings are humorous, and make people wonder.

Here's some background.

Cheers,
Bart

fahim mohammed said:

human faces defaced by an apple....

Click to expand...

Fahim,

Yes it may seem like a distortion of the face, but look closely. Actually it's simply that the man's face is placed behind the apple. We all hide behind facades. He's also not the suit he is wearing! There's no disrespect, just a line of a few things in a very odd order.

The two, (the apple and the man behind it), are not joined in any way. The person is, as it were, hiding behind the apple. This is a conversation Magritte, the painter is having with us.

Magritte, to my knowledge never distorted any objects just placed them in unexpected positions to have us ask questions about ourselves.

Asher

fahim mohammed said:

Defacing human beings is ' art ' in your thinking?
I posted a pineapple and a mountain scenery too.

Maybe you prefer human faces defaced by an apple than a pineapple. Of course, you don't have pineapples
growing normally in Germany ( or is it France ).

But you did not answer my question..How many in this world would know the artist whose work you posted..without acknowledgement to the artist; unless it is your work.

More importantly, it shows to me what you consider to be ' art '. A defaced human being!!

Your standards are certainly very different than mine as regards to what is considered 'art '.

Defaced humans as ' art '. Is that a norm back in your place? To deface humans and consider it ' art '.

Click to expand...

I did not realize that you asked the question "How many in this world would know the artist whose work you posted". But if you want to know, I would say that René Magritte is well known as a major surrealistic painter and that this particular painting was extremely influential. Maybe you would like to read the wikipedia article for references about the use of that painting in fiction or popular culture.

I am actually quite surprised that you did not know the painting. I did not expect that when I posted it.

Asher, you do make valid and reasonable points that need to be addressed.

My definition of what constitutes ' art ' is different than yours. And different than most others that post or comment here. The ' usual suspects ' , as some here have referred generously to OPF members mostly belong to similar cultures and to the best of my knowledge profess similar beliefs; or lack of them.

There is a vast, very vast , majority of people that do not subscribe to this OPF member expressed views or culture. But they are not represented at OPF. In membership or to a lesser degree in participation.

Thus OPF members' views express only a certain restricted and biased view point. Like clean sheets not being available in some Far East countries. Similarly their opinions are biased in regards to what is considered as ' art '.

If these others can argue and post in support of their definition of ' art ' and ' artists '; I too can express my opinions and post what I consider to be ' Art ' and who I consider to be the ' Artist '.

I do not consider defaced humans as ' art '. Never shall.

I never create anything. I do not believe neither does anyone else here. Juxtaposition of existing elements
( such as a person's face replaced or covered by an apple ) is not ' art ' as far as I am concerned. Chiseling away stone and marble is not creation..but an experienced effort to copy something that exists.

I do not believe in ' art du jour ' to coin a phrase. And to me ' Art' is universal. Needs no explanation and transcends all time and cultures. Else it is just an effort calculated to appeal to a specific audience, time, and/or region. Such works are nothing more than ' items ' of interest as far as I am concerned.

I do appreciate that others, including you, hold different opinions to mine. I respect that fact. I also know that millions share my view of ' ART '. I expect our views to be respected too. And if I am shouted at, I shall shout right back. Whisper and I too shall be unheard by others.

Kindest regards.

Jerome Marot said:

I did not realize that you asked the question "How many in this world would know the artist whose work you posted". But if you want to know, I would say that René Magritte is well known as a major surrealistic painter and that this particular painting was extremely influential. Maybe you would like to read the wikipedia article for references about the use of that painting in fiction or popular culture.

I am actually quite surprised that you did not know the painting. I did not expect that when I posted it.

Click to expand...

There was nothing to ' realize ' in my question Jerome. It had to do with you reading it; and answering it as you have done now.

I am surprised that you expect me to know of ' artists ' belonging to your culture. I may know of some. But I am ignorant of most. I do wish I had taken some ' art ' related subject as an elective when I was a student. But that is my loss.

' Popular culture ' as it refers to your culture. Not a universal culture. The two are very different issues.
And that is something to be appreciated in a forum that purports to be an international one.

Art and art!

fahim mohammed said:

A

If these others can argue and post in support of their definition of ' art ' and ' artists '; I too can express my opinions and post what I consider to be ' Art ' and who I consider to be the ' Artist '.

Click to expand...

Fahim,

Your impression and those of billions of others is inherently correct in its context. There's no argument. Let's call that for, the moment, "higher Art", "art of heaven"or the gifts we are born to on this planet. nothing competes with that in wonder, beauty, rank and stature.

Now the art we refer to here and the Western and great Arab cities that have art galleries, is art which is merely work that we'd pay money for or come to admire in a museum or gallery. We could call the art in galleries, "collectable works of man with prices", but we vainly call it art. That's the crude, inexact term we use and it works. Being understood by equally nice folk in villages outside Yerevan, in the Andes or coffee plantations in Peru does not alter it's utility or in anyway take anything away from appreciating the Art of heaven we all admire.

fahim mohammed said:

I never create anything.

Click to expand...

Again, like the word "art" as Art or art it has different usage in different contexts and they're not necessarily related. when you take a picture at the time you decide form the angle you choose and including and excluding what you choose, that picture becomes unique to you, only you and that moment. no person can repeat that exactly. It's unique only to you, your actions and motivations. so it's your creation. now does it have any standing next to the human brain or the birth of a child, of course not. Still, in terms of language, it's a creation, just an exceedingly humble one.

fahim mohammed said:

.......... Chiseling away stone and marble is not creation..but an experienced effort to copy something that exists.

Click to expand...

. No person ever looked like not posed like Michelangelo's Dawid. It's a metaphor not a reality and certainly not a copy of anything that existed, rather an export of an idea in his mind. That's Michelangelo's art. Unlike most representations of David previously made, this sculpture showed not a man in armor but a boy armed with a stone, a slingshot, determination and faith in his God. That's the whole point!

Asher

Asher Kelman said:

Fahim,

.....
. No person ever looked like not posed like Michelangelo's Dawid. It's a metaphor not a reality and certainly not a copy of anything that existed, rather an export of an idea in his mind. That's Michelangelo's art. Unlike most representations of David previously made, this sculpture showed not a man in armor but a boy armed with a stone, a slingshot, determination and faith in his God. That's the whole point!

Asher

Click to expand...

He painted a Chapel, didn't he. That's how he got a headache!!
And he must have known about the Jewish and Christian books and their contents. No?
He surely must have heard of Goliath too! Put these together and there you have a sculpture.

After all Asher, there is no shortage of depictions and images of the Creator in various religions. This guy, Michelangelo, was doing work for a big church. I got a neck ache just trying to look up at the ceiling!

He was a very good stone mason.

fahim mohammed said:

There was nothing to ' realize ' in my question Jerome. It had to do with you reading it; and answering it as you have done now.

I am surprised that you expect me to know of ' artists ' belonging to your culture. I may know of some. But I am ignorant of most. I do wish I had taken some ' art ' related subject as an elective when I was a student. But that is my loss.

' Popular culture ' as it refers to your culture. Not a universal culture. The two are very different issues.
And that is something to be appreciated in a forum that purports to be an international one.

Click to expand...

I wrote "popular culture" as it is the title of the paragraph of wikipedia I was referring to. But you raise an interesting question about cultural differences. Would you like to educate me and other members of the forum about artists belonging to your culture?

Fahim,

Let's refer to work of God as Art. Then we can distinguish it from the common, lower class work sold in art galleries and the western world as "art". By this convention, we know we are not talking about the same standards or genius.

I'd go further, even to give up the term art to describe photographs we cherish so much that we'd pay substantial sums for owning. We could simply refer to that sort of photograph as m-art, merchandisable creative photographic work of humans sold in galleries or to collectors. We could, instead, choose to call them "bongo", "klibs" or anything else that might catch on! But we already know the difference. No need to beat a dead horse. We'd never mistake a sunset or newborn child for a Van Gogh painting in the Tate Gallery in London!

When I find a better word for such art or photographic art, I'll share it with you. Right now, I'm flummoxed!

Asher

Fair warning, personal remarks will eventually be deleted. We cannot have OPF storing insullts which Google will reference for ever. So please get back to the photograph.

Asher

Cem_Usakligil said:

I am sorry I came back. The only reason why I did so was to be able to wish you well in your recovery following your recent surgery.

Click to expand...

That is very gracious of you. Thank you.

I too wish you and your loved ones well always.

Kindest regards.

p.s. Cem, I am sure neither of us wish anything other than good luck for either of us. Our differences are many. But that does not, with me, translate into ill wishes for you. Life is too short to harbor such feelings. Take care.

Now this is unarguably ART:


This is at the ranger station at the Three Rivers Petroglyph site, south central New Mexico, during an outing of the New Mexico Roadrunner Chapter, Red Hat Society.

Yes, Jean's walking stick is too long for her - it is mine. It is a fine piece of art, made for me in Texas. But it's not Fine Art - just fine art.

Best regards,

Doug

fahim mohammed said:

That is very gracious of you. Thank you.

I too wish you and your loved ones well always.

Kindest regards.

p.s. Cem, I am sure neither of us wish anything other than good luck for either of us. Our differences are many. But that does not, with me, translate into ill wishes for you. Life is too short to harbor such feelings. Take care.

Click to expand...

I am glad to hear that. I do not wish ill on you nor on anybody else. You too take care.

Jerome Marot said:

Don't.

Just don't. Please.

Click to expand...

Thanks Jerome, I will stick around a while longer.

Asher...here then is one form of 'art' from another region of the world..

p.s. oops..the image posted is somehow protected on my site...sorry.
I shall try to ' unprotected it ' or ask this post to be removed.

Apologies.

In this forum, as in any "forum", we not only get insights into the actual "topic" but was well into the dynamics of human interaction.

One of the most curious of those is the occasional controversy over whether a certain matter is controversial of not.

I am reminded of a time a few years ago when our small Episcopal church was about to conduct a search for a new rector. One step was that we were formulating a survey to be sent to the membership, asking their opinions on many matters, the results of which might lead to criteria for the selection of candidates. I was on the committee that did that.

Many of the questions had to do with the respondent's view of "his church".

In that vein, I suggested that we make one of the questions:


A fellow committee member, Claude, said, "Kerr, there is no point to ask that. The answer is well known."

"I agree", said Mark. "The answer is well known."

"Yes", said Claude. "Episcopalians consider themselves to be 'Catholic'".

"No, no,", said Mark. "Episcopalians do not consider themselves to be 'Catholic'".

A lively debate ensued in the committee.

The conclusion: We should not include the question in the survey as it is "too controversial".

Follow up:

• A couple of years later, after I had been widowed, I married another member of the committee - you all know Carla.

• Claude was my best man.

Best regards,

Doug

Considered by many to be a work of art...

fahim mohammed said:

Considered by many to be a work of art...

Click to expand...

Fahim,

Yes, it's considered by many as a great work of art and that's true. It's marvelous to look at. Tradition and generations of architects and visionaries made this possible. The discipline of the artisans and organization to get this actually made is remarkable. Everything is handmade and there are no shortcuts.

Asher

Very intricate/beautiful and a nice capture.

Cem_Usakligil said:

Very intricate/beautiful and a nice capture.

Click to expand...

Very kind of you to stop by Cem.

I appreciate that very much. Thank you.

Warmest regards.