At the risk of 'beating a dead horse' that has nothing to do with Lilypond, but you put some thought into remarks below and so here's a reply and then can me move on to any feed-back about the online compiler, file-manager and so on? Scantily-clad model on page matter is closed, it was ill-conceived, pointed out, and she's being removed. After I say bye. : >At some point of time you need to make up your mind about whether you >are aiming for a depiction of beauty, or a pretty woman. The problem is >not that you are lacking a model, but an artist.
Interesting - 'aiming for a depiction of beauty or a pretty woman' - they're mutually exclusive? I was aiming for a depiction of beauty, and chose a beautiful woman. It could have been a beautiful sunset and why am I even writing this? >And your rambling about "my taste in women" makes quite obvious that >your referencing Aquin is not really much more than name-dropping with >regard to executing an artistic vision: You omitted the reference I made in the very next message - 'all in fun. etc' The 'rambling ' was 'all in fun'. Not meant for a peer-reviewed journal, but a brief comment 'all in fun'. The quote on the page 'beauty: that which pleases merely by being perceived' is by Thomas Aquinas, hence I called it the 'Aquinas quote'. No name-dropping, simply attributing the quote to its (supposed) author. >Most pictures of a sunset will do a better job of projecting a concept >of _beauty_, even sunsets not in Toronto with their own agency. Maybe. I think a pretty woman is more beautiful than a sunset but it's subjective. As for 'own agency' - I merely pointed that out in response to a suggestion that the modelling wasn't professional. It is professional - Samantha is in high demand. This is a dumb point. >" 'Pretty' is almost a counterthesis to Aquinous "beauty", and that makes >it quite a challenge to put _this_ artistic vision into being by using a >human female: while there certainly is some unique potential because of >the fundamental appeal to a human recipient, this also offers _far_ too >many possibilities for distracting from the artistic missive to make >this easy" The Aquinas definition of 'beauty' is: "that which is pleasing merely by being perceived". I don't know what it means that 'pretty' is a 'counterthesis' to 'beauty', as defined: without a definition of 'pretty'; how can a defined term be a 'counterthesis' to an undefined one? At any rate. that a 'human female' - as you put it - has potential for being an object of beauty to a 'human recipient' is something we can agree on. I will leave to others to decode the sub-text in this. I'm getting bored. Thanks for the comments, and the critique. Critiques are good, and I'm changing the landing page accordingly - as noted in a separate message. Apologies to those who think this is way off-topic. It is. -Mike On Thu, Jul 12, 2012 at 1:07 AM, David Kastrup <d...@gnu.org> wrote: > Mike Blackstock <blackstock.m...@gmail.com> writes: > > > I seem to be relishing in your bluntness - cute - so let me return the > > favor. The women is a top Toronto model with her own agency; I'll take > > her tastes over yours, thanks. What your taste in women is - and who > > knows what*that* is, I shudder to contemplate it - doesn't concern > > me; ditto with Debian. Stick to judgments about music engraving. > > At some point of time you need to make up your mind about whether you > are aiming for a depiction of beauty, or a pretty woman. The problem is > not that you are lacking a model, but an artist. > > And your rambling about "my taste in women" makes quite obvious that > your referencing Aquin is not really much more than name-dropping with > regard to executing an artistic vision: > > In his Summa Theologiae St. Thomas gives three distinguishing > characteristics of beauty: wholeness or integrity, proportion or > harmony, and claritas which can be translated splendor, radiance, > light, brilliance. The chief characteristic is claritas, 'radiance' > ... beautiful things shine. The beautiful illuminates our > intellectus with the intuition of understanding. The eyes and ears > of our soul enable our vision to see the transcendent beauty present > ontologically in all being.". > > Most pictures of a sunset will do a better job of projecting a concept > of _beauty_, even sunsets not in Toronto with their own agency. > > "Pretty" is almost a counterthesis to Aquinous "beauty", and that makes > it quite a challenge to put _this_ artistic vision into being by using a > human female: while there certainly is some unique potential because of > the fundamental appeal to a human recipient, this also offers _far_ too > many possibilities for distracting from the artistic missive to make > this easy. > > LilyPond's boilerplate slogan is "beautiful typesetting", not "pretty > music". Did you even bother telling to your model and agency your aim > and artistic vision of showing the overarching of Aquinous beauty, the > resonating of God's presence in the fabric of the world and its human > perception and understanding across musical typesetting and the > appearance of a woman? If you didn't, _her_ tastes do not even come > into play with regard to the suitability of the result. > > -- > David Kastrup >
_______________________________________________ lilypond-user mailing list lilypond-user@gnu.org https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/lilypond-user
