| HOME | ||
| Danz Family Forums |
||
| Links | Sounds | |
| Portal | Pictures | |
| Palm | Videos | |
| People | Private | |
| Interesting | Site Map | |
| Texts | Contact | |
| * Firearms | * Tulsa Weather | |
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | |||
| 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 |
| 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 |
| 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 |
| 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 |
Most Recent Comments
Michaela: haa i love this! im not an american but i would love to try peanut butter and jelly it just sounds a... [view]Most Commented Posts
Modest Swimwear (389 Comments)
By Category
Audio BlogBy Month
August 2010
Legal Blogs
Above the LawOklahoma Blogs
AKA Mike HorsheadPolitical Blogs
Ace of SpadesWeb Friends
A day in the life...Web Rings
< ? # > ameriBLOGs
Today Mama broke out the paint supplies for a creative afternoon activity.
Will started out using a brush. But, about half way though switched to his fingers.
Drew knew exactly what he wanted to express with his painting. The end result of both boys is as good as any of the crap Jackson Pollock ever thew down on a canvas. Much like Pollock's numbered works, Drew and Will's masterpieces are unnamed because the viewer should not search for representational elements in the paintings but, rather, "look passively and try to receive what the painting has to offer and not bring a subject matter or preconceived idea of what they are to be looking for." (Translation: I'm a talentless hack perpetuating a great fraud, please buy my paintings because I'm afraid of having a real job.)
I love Norman-Rockwell's "Connoisseur." I don't know what Rockwell was actually trying to say but, to me, he was throwing mud in Pollock's eye, saying, "Hey Jackson, I can paint as good a Pollock as you or anyone else, lets see you try and paint a Rockwell."
Recently I've had some extended discussions elsewhere on the interweb as to the definition of "art." I tend to a more restrictive classical definition that art takes talent not present in the average person. Art is not decoration, performance or that which any random person can imitate. Most of the people I've been arguing with have been brought up never to judge anyone or impose any kind of standard on people. They believe if someone says something is art, it is art. Or, if someone merely tries to make art, that their endeavor results in art. Otherwise, you might have to--heaven forbid--judge somebody or disappoint some precious snowflake and inform them that despite their best efforts they really are not artists. Such expansive definitions, ultimately, have no bounds and everything become art. If everything is art, then nothing is art. I conclude, my "restrictive" definition is the only logical definition and, ultimately, less restrictive.
Two more shots of Will and Drew as they finish up after the jump.
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this post: Finger Painting with the Boys.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.danzfamily.com/cgi-bin/mt4/mt-tb.cgi/676
Post a comment