I think a work of art is judge by the parts that shine/that stand
out, the parts that say design,
but justify the parts that don't, that distinctive taste, when the
Melody lingers on, when one feels that quiver between the eyebrows.
And so on............
mando
On Sep 5, 2008, at 9:38 AM, Chris Miller wrote:
Cheerskep wrote:
"So the response to the quote from Chris above is this: In general,
writers
will "please themselves" the most when a bit works for BOTH
themselves and the
audience."
... and I'm wondering if we can't just replace the word "writers"
with the
phrase "professionals of any kind" --- to include not just painters
and
musicians -- but anyone who is responsible to a client - whether
that client
is an investor or a consumer.
Responsibility is testable --- it's either there -- or it isn't --
the client
is either pleased or he's not --- which is more than could be said
about
inspirations and intentions which seem to flicker on and off with
personal
whimsy.
And then Cheerskep wrote:
But Chris appears not to appreciate that both clarity and ambiguity
are a
matter of degree. Every work of art is a composite of many bits
("No work is
ever just a single work.")
There are bits that are themselves composites of bits -- and it
appears to me
that only the smallest bits can be understood with clarity.
Did the Richard Gere character learn some fighting techniques on
the streets
of Manilla ? Yes -- he did -- that much is clear. But what that
says about
his relationship with a martial arts tradition -- and his character
-- that
can only be ambiguous -- as well as the big question of why we
should care
about his story at all.
____________________________________________________________
Click for free info on online masters degrees and make up to $150K/
year
http://thirdpartyoffers.netzero.net/TGL2231/fc/
Ioyw6ijmifsIxd2TwHlxVMkgN2bdP5
scD44eY9cHJFPg1lQOK4o2U0/
