All three, and easily identified symbolically.

mando

On Sep 23, 2008, at 2:53 PM, William Conger wrote:

Is that nude female or male or transgender?

WC


--- On Tue, 9/23/08, ARMANDO BAEZA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

From: ARMANDO BAEZA <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Examining the theory
To: [email protected]
Date: Tuesday, September 23, 2008, 4:46 PM
Cheerskep,

As I start a new sculpture design , which in my case
simply the nude figure. Most every  thing you state
that runs thru your mind, perhaps runs  subconscious
through mine, also, but unaware while in the process
of it's creation. I rely and trust on my training and
experience within my inner being to do that for me.
Knowing that the nude can express endless universal
emotions ,ideas, symbolisms is part of my objective.

mando

--- On Tue, 9/23/08, [EMAIL PROTECTED]
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Examining the theory
To: [email protected]
Date: Tuesday, September 23, 2008, 11:27 AM
In a message dated 9/23/08 12:35:39 PM,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:


I understand that the artist is concerned only
with his/her perception - whether an observer
shared
in some specific
meaning is apparently not important;

Geoff -- You have to keep in mind that this forum is
dominated by visual
artists, among whom you're likely to find many --
though not all -- who honestly
feel, "The hell with being preoccupied with the
effect
of my work on others. I
paint what I want."

I know I can be a pain in the neck for many
fellow-listers,
but, say I, I am
from the forum point of view healthily different. In
two
ways: For one, I seem
to be at the moment the only contributing
"philosopher". For another, I'm an
"artist" of sorts, but my "art" is
different from visual art.

I'm a playwright.   Behind every line I write
there is
a good deal of concern
about its effects on contemplators (both readers and
live
audience members).
The concerns are various. Often the concern is focused
on
immediate
impression: If I write a line that's supposed to
be
moving or funny or surprising, and
in every developmental reading or workshop performance
it
proves to be a dud,
chances are I'll either revise it (or its
preparatory
lead-up) or delete it.

Accepting what I think is the spirit behind your use
of the
word 'meaning',
I'll make an ad-hoc distinction between two kinds
of
"meaning-notion" I want to
occasion. One I'll call cerebral --
"exposition" -- the other, emotional. In
exposition, the narrative writer wants the viewer to
take
on board certain
"facts" about characters and their situation
--
e.g. this woman is that man's
daughter, this guy is very rich, that fellow has a
terminal
illness. In those
cases I know the "fact" I want to convey
"clearly".

But much of the "emotional" impact, the
idiosyncratic interpretation a viewer
brings to bear, I'm happy to leave to the viewer.
I
LIKE it when I see
audience members leaving the theater arguing about
given
characters or events. I can
imagine Shakespeare's being content to see viewers
holding different
judgments about the sanity or pitiability of Hamlet or
Lear. Granted, if I created a
character that I liked and found intensely
interesting, and
every single viewer
felt he was boring and a bastard, I'd take that as
damn
bad news.

In practice, though, except in the farce I wrote, I
know my
characters are
multiplex, and I understand it when some viewers like
them
some of the time and
are repelled some of the time. I don't expect
uniform
reactions in an audience
to characters like those.   In one of my current
scripts,
there's an
ultra-smart, highly educated guy. I'm aware some
viewers will recoil from him on that
fact alone. Well, I don't write for those people.
I
don't want to spend two
hours watching slackers in someone else's play,
and I
sure don't want to spend
months writing about one. So in that sense I
"paint
what I want". But behind
that decision is a conviction there are potential
viewers
who also like being
with gifted characters.

As a writer, I work at creating a gripping storyline.
And
I'm looking to grip
not just myself but an audience.

All of which is to say that "whether an observer
shared in some specific
meaning is apparently not important" doesn't
apply
to this would-be "artist".






**************
Looking for simple solutions to your real-life
financial
challenges?  Check out WalletPop for the latest news
and
information, tips and

Reply via email to