Newberry

Cancelled
  • Content Count

    682
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

2 Neutral

About Newberry

  • Rank
    Michael

Previous Fields

  • Full Name
    BotReport

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. Newberry

    Newbsie

    That’s it, isn’t it? Funny, I think you want to be loved and respected by me. And when it doesn’t work out that way you attack even more. It is kind of creepy. In real life I don’t associate with anyone like you.
  2. Newberry

    Newbsie

    Sure, or not.
  3. Newberry

    Newbsie

    The Nauman piece reminded me of how you communicate. Didn't get the South Park thing, but I don't watch it. Agreed about a lot romantic figurative art, much of it is kitsch, not unlike your sweet still lifes. TRAC (google) is trying to spearhead their movement based on Nerdrum's definition of kitsch and sentimentality. And Poets and Artists (google them) is doing an excellent job of promoting figurative art, some interesting concepts and works, some not so much. I would think your still lifes would fit well in Cordair but you probably burnt that bridge long ago. I am guessing you don't don't have much or any life drawing skills, which would help explain your disdain expressive figurative poses, the expressions are just part of human experience for centuries, not new to objectivists, Delacroix, Michelangelo, Rodin and etc. You seem to insist that romanticism is a kind of robotic deduction without observation or personal experience, artists just show us who they are, some good some not. I think Larsen literally tried to show us what he thinks Rand's aesthetics is by illustrating a few scenes from Atlas Shrugged, but all I see is his work, and I think he is a good storyteller in his paintings. At least with discussions with me you seem to think romanticism is bad and postmodernism is good.
  4. Newberry

    Newbsie

    https://twitter.com/museummodernart/status/1089943711189032960?s=21
  5. Newberry

    Newbsie

    I think you, particularly, are wise to discount everything I write.
  6. Newberry

    Newbsie

    I made a comment somewhere ages ago about Rand’s unfair dismissal of Rembrandt’s Side of Beef which is a quick oil sketch and I contrasted it with his multi-year project Danae. Makes sense to me. About judgments here is a link to what I think you are referring https://atlassociety.org/commentary/commentary-blog/6268-detecting-value-judgments-in-painting I don’t see what your problem is with it, but it doesn’t really matter, everyone makes their own choices about art, I only shared what I believe.
  7. You sound like you picked up the bad habit of an ARI nutter or like Perigo when they go on an ex-communication frenzy.
  8. Newberry

    Newbsie

    I didn't like your multiple choice options. Quote from above: " I tend to think about the relationship between the amount of time involved in creating work and if the subject matter is worth that time. I doubt I would spend more than a few hours on symbols of death. I did spend about 3 weeks on a portrait of a tattooed guy. But just the painting of the skull it seems kind of creepy to me. Though I have done a lot of anatomy studies for paintings, especially if a run into a problem; always good to build from the bones out."
  9. “...admit your errors!” Lol you write like you have a hammer. I’ll check out Objectivism online, it might be a good fit. Thanks for your compliment that Hicks hangs on my ever word, I am sure that would be news to him. Now he is a scholar, philosopher, and philosophical historian. He is also active in recorded debates, publishing in several languages, and teaching college philosophy courses. It’s kinda of cool he is gaining traction in social media as well. Plus he is a nice guy and a collector of Newberrys.
  10. Falsehoods and truth in aesthetics are in the minds of the readers, either they resonate or they don’t. One of the reasons I have gotten talks and articles, such as about Kant, accepted was because I approached them from my artist perspective, rather than as a philosopher, scholar, or historian, which I am obviously not. Undoubtedly a falsehood but I get the sense you’re a disgruntled Rand fanboy.