anthony Posted May 6, 2014 Share Posted May 6, 2014 The purpose of the artist is to convey 'something'(that's implicit) To whom? Why bother? I think this concrete, stylized work is then 'received' by the viewer whose purpose is to find sustenance from that artist's concepts of truth and existence. Rand's answer was that she wished to convey it to herself. You seem to have a problem with that. J I'm interested in this last comment. It seems senseless. What do you mean by "she wished to convey it to herself"? I was talking about the self-evident process of art-to-viewer. Again, you've told me what I'm going to think and how I will react - a} that I'm tied to Rand's apron strings...b} no, I am not faithful enough to her ideas ... blah blah: All patently false, to anyone who has ever read me. And still you have not revealed openly and honestly what your thoughts and evocations of the leaf drawing are. Let alone "proved" anything. You already know my response, you say, and in a rare display of bashfulness do not want to show anybody your hand. A is A. An apple is an apple, a leaf is a leaf. I think you've made an invalid connection between Rand on one still life painting and assumed it goes for all still-life illustrations too. It's nothing new, J. You always have invoked Rand when it suits you to "win" a debate, and excoriated her when it suits you, too. Tricky as ever - but you can't have your cake and eat it, y'know. It's the concepts of art and art appreciation I'm interested in, not this concrete-mindedness, so there is nothing more for me here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!Register a new account
Already have an account? Sign in here.Sign In Now