> William writes:
>
> "...it can be
> troubling for a philosopher-king to admit, as Leonardo insisted, that
> artmaking
> was an art of the (noble) mind and not the hand."
>
> I don't know the context of Leonardo's remark, so I can't be sure what he
> had in mind, but perhaps this is a pertinent response: When I have
> contemplated a work that occasioned in me what I'd call an "aesthetic
> experience",
> I've often been ready to credit both the mind and "hand" of the creator.
> Certainly this has happened when I've been listening to a great pianist or
> watching a great dancer. Other pianists might have comparable digital
> dexterity and celerity, but the action of the great pianist can deliver more
> than just those gifts.
>
> Many singers knew the music on the page as well as Pavarotti, they "knew
> where the music was", but the mind was not enough. Only his larynx could
> deliver the way he could
>
> I've read an actor commenting on the way another actor just "filled space"
> as he walked across the stage. "I just can't do that," the first actor
> said.
>
> I'm not knowledgeable enough to know if any visual creators have looked
> upon another painter or illustrator and said, in effect, "his hand just knows
> something". When I've contemplated "The Line King", Al Hirschfeld, his
> result was often only because his hand could execute what his mind "saw".
>
> I've seen Kate's work up close, and wondered just how the hell she does it
> -- not just the envisioning of the thing, but the execution.
