Good comment! WC
--- On Mon, 12/22/08, Michael Brady <[email protected]> wrote: > From: Michael Brady <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: Geoff, Neurology and "Art" > To: [email protected] > Date: Monday, December 22, 2008, 3:28 PM > On Dec 22, 2008, at 4:09 PM, William Conger wrote: > > > Actually, I think it's fair to infer that the cave > artists did have > > a theory of taste or aesthetics > > Perhaps it's sort of like this > > aesthetics : canon : art :: rhetoric : grammar : > language > > Both pictorial art and language are "free > creative" acts, that is, > each of them forms and shapes its products (images, words) > completely > separately from the things pointed at. Over time and within > a > relatively contiguous community of recipients, norms of how > these > forms should look or sound arise and are endorsed and > retained-- > canons, standards, conventions, grammars, preferred > pronunciations ... > ta-da, taste! > > Consider how often, and how unnoticed, it is that certain > constructions are almost entirely conventional, not truly > imitative or > "representative," yet they don't arrest our > attention. Outlines > themselves are an invisible convention; hatch marks for > shading are > sometimes an invisible convention. In language (I'll > use English, > which I'm most familiar with), structural words > (prepositions, > conjunctions, etc.) tend to remain invisible until, through > > repetition, odd locution, or misuse, the reader or listener > becomes > aware of them. > > Rules and guidelines eventually develop to describe how > images or > language work, why certain forms or presentations can > appear to be > defective and others quite extraordinary. I suspect the > rules were > developed as teaching aids to instruct the student how to > work > efficiently and what to avoid, as practical lore and folk > wisdom based > on previous success or failure. > > We are at the 20,000th year of a long process of teaching > and refining > techniques, and the guidelines have become very detailed, > extensive, > and complicated. > > BTW, I've often run into the situation that a > non-artist really likes > one of my paintings that I think is poor because of this > and that-- > things I can easily see but that the other person just > isn't attuned > to. The other person isn't schooled in the conventions, > and thus is > less aware of departures from a norm ... you know, those > guidelines > that form part of the foundations of taste and aesthetics. > > > | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | > Michael Brady > [email protected]
