portrait-sculpture.com Forum Index portrait-sculpture.com
A site provided for professional portrait and figurative sculptors, as well as serious students
 
 FAQFAQ   SearchSearch   MemberlistMemberlist   UsergroupsUsergroups   Register(DISABLED)Register(DISABLED) 
 ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   Log inLog in 

Rodin
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    portrait-sculpture.com Forum Index -> Internet Cafe
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Stuart



Joined: 29 Nov 2006
Posts: 834

PostPosted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 11:38 am    Post subject: Britpack brickabrack Reply with quote

They are a bunch of 'conceptual' artists who were propelled into the limelight by Charles Saachi and given the stamp of approval by Nicholas Serota, one time Grand Wiffler at the Tate. There were some original elements in the first combined show, Sensation which achieved some aclaim and was quite enetrtaining here and there.
Damien Hurst (shark), Tracy Emin (dirty bed linen), Gavin Turk,(himself as Sid Vicious) Chapman Bros (toy soldiers) & Marc Quinn (headcast full of his own blood)were some of them.
I like to be generous and overall positive, but .......................
Stuart
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Joel Levinson



Joined: 18 Apr 2009
Posts: 111
Location: Long Branch, New Jersey

PostPosted: Wed Mar 10, 2010 12:43 pm    Post subject: More Reply with quote

Stewart,
Thank you for the history.Another aspect of my disdain is the ease of that which some call art.In college we had an art history course.We had Praeger's Encyclopedia of Art which contained beautiful color plates of classic paintings from Middle Ages and Ren.The project was to place tracing paper over the paintings and extract the elements of composition whether linear,color,form,etc.The implication was that these elements could stand on their own as a work of art.I was once as a youngster invited to visit a professor of sculpture in Long Island.His heads were the basic shape of the head a ridge for the nose, lines for the eyes and nose.These "finished" pieces were what would have been the first two hours another sculptor would carry on from.I remember when watching your cd that someone similiar to Giacametti might have taken the piece towards the beginning when you first sculpted the profile alone and call it finished.
Another time I had just walked through a large portion of the Met in New York seeing things such as Carpauex's Ugolino and Chinese porcelains when I came up to gallery being prepared for a modern 20th century exhibit.There were two very large slabs of steel welded together with three people standing there,arms crossed debating the social meaning of the work as if extracting architectural elements from a complete creation is in itself a work.
Where is the deveopment and appreciation for the craftsmanship and technical know-how that are pieces of a complete work?The components are not works in themselves.A life cast is not sculpture and the caster is not a sculptor,he/she is a caster.I have alot of repect for good casters.However that is what they are craftspeople,casters.I'm not comparing the two,but,the word artist/sculptor gets thrown around as easily as we throw around the word hero.
Joel
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Stuart



Joined: 29 Nov 2006
Posts: 834

PostPosted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 6:39 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't have anything against conceptualism per se. There have been some wonderfully intelligent and often humerous items manifested by this school. It seems to me that it is part of what we do anyway. It's just that often art left at this concept stage has not gone the full mile as it were and many pieces constructed under this lofty title suffer from being just what they claim to be.........merely ideas, (like the ones you might get in the middle of the night after a night on the tiles) and often only partly formed and often half-cocked in the pure light of day.
Most artists know that working through their original ideas often leads them to one of 2 places. 1. the idea gets stronger as it is developed through the process of making.
2. the idea is abandoned or thought more about.

I suspect that many of the Britpack I mentioned earlier, would have been catapulted to fame in the way that they were if it weren't for Mr Charles Saachi and his cash. He bought himself a stable of artists and lavished them. They are still around, but it all culminated with Mr Hursts (real) diamond encrusted skull, followed by Marc Quinn's $1.5m (real) gold Kate Moss sculpture.

Anyway, it all caused a big stir the UK art game and many young students at Goldsmiths and other institutions were attracted by this fast track to fame and riches. Sadly these pots of gold have there bottom, and there will be many who having been told they only need to conceptualise and have someone else make it, now I suspect, will be wishing they'd learned a few techniques while they were at college and developed their imaginations along the way.

It will probably lead to another generation of teachers without traditional skills.

What a treat to be given the time and the space and the opportunity to learn about Form, & Structure & Colour and Light & Composition & Anatomy & & & & & &
Unfortunately, I forgot to go to art school...............I might have been casting my big toe in (real) platignum today............
Stuart
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Jeanette Lewis



Joined: 13 Oct 2009
Posts: 595
Location: Merseyside U.K.

PostPosted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 10:32 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hmmm....would that be a one off Stuart, or limited edition to a pair?
Jeanette
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jeanette Lewis



Joined: 13 Oct 2009
Posts: 595
Location: Merseyside U.K.

PostPosted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 10:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Just voluntarily removing this post as it was a drift too far from the original thread ...
Jeanette


Last edited by Jeanette Lewis on Fri Mar 12, 2010 10:54 pm; edited 2 times in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Phil Minchinton



Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 190
Location: London, UK

PostPosted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 11:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

I know this thread has drifted slightly, but I've seen some of Rodin's quick studies and have no regard for them at all. In the same light, Micheal Landy ( a Fellow of the Royal Academy) currently has a giant, clear perspex bin at The South London Gallery in London that for six weeks is being filled with 'failed' works of art; including donations from Emins, Wearing and Hirst. It is in itself being regarded as a 'work of art' and is due for demolition and burial in a landfill site come Monday. How appropriate....it's just a shame the 'artists' didn't insist on holding their donated works 'til the end...... Very Happy
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Joel Levinson



Joined: 18 Apr 2009
Posts: 111
Location: Long Branch, New Jersey

PostPosted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 1:16 pm    Post subject: to continue Reply with quote

I know I'm very opinionated when it comes to what I believe is art.However,I know that others differ and have the right to pursue whatever "school" of art they wish.We have a group in town called SICA,Shore Institute of Contemporary Art.They have a funky old building that was a can factory.They narrowly only showed what they considered to be contemporary art.They had studio space for rent and a coffee shop and a very large mortgage monthly.They announced recently that the building was being put up for sale.I can't help but feel that if they had been open to classes,exhibits,competitions etc. for all "schools" of art they could have created an enviroment so dynamic that they might have drawn many more dollars and participants,and,great debate.
Joel
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jeanette Lewis



Joined: 13 Oct 2009
Posts: 595
Location: Merseyside U.K.

PostPosted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 3:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Phil,
yes I am part responsible for the drift - sorry! Embarassed
I viewed the Burghers of Calais in situ when I was young and was quite impressed, but I have just checked them out a second time and they are not how I remember.
I also re-familiarised myself with "John the Baptist" as Stuart mentioned.
Even with my limited knowledge I have to say its very awkward, and looking at the neck area - the head may well have been stuck back on after salome finished with it and her mum wanted to get the dishes done.
I wonder what future archeologists will make of the contents of that perspex bin Phil? The mind boggles...
Jeanette
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Phil Minchinton



Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 190
Location: London, UK

PostPosted: Thu Mar 11, 2010 3:52 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Joel, I'm certainly a traditionalist but open to new works that demonstrate depth of thought and capability in creation, especially if they possess that indefinable factor that transcends the run of the mill expectation. As for SICA, I'm reminded of an evening class I attended a few years ago. The school holds an annual exhibition of works by its full time students but would not countenance including any work by the evening class students amongst whom there was some exceptional talent (not me I hasten to add). This attitude left me feeling that unless you were prepared to hand over a lot of money for a three year diploma, there would be no recognition from 'the establishment'. I'm sure this was a mistake on their part as they would have a wider support base if they changed their policy. It seems as though the old boy’s club mentality exists everywhere.

Jeanette, I think drifting is good sometimes! As for the dishes, I now have a mental image that is making me chuckle every time! Laughing

Just as an aside, I did wonder the other day whether with Hedi's blessing and via this forum, we might set a future date for an online 'virtual exhibition thread' for anyone wishing to contribute. It might make me get out and do something....any thoughts?
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jeanette Lewis



Joined: 13 Oct 2009
Posts: 595
Location: Merseyside U.K.

PostPosted: Fri Mar 12, 2010 9:10 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

Spot the difference,




Not sure if I am being a bit unfair, to compare the two images...
The first image of John the Baptist is in the Baptistry at St. Mary Maggiore.
(I don't know the artist but I think its very beautiful Smile )
Second with the purple backgrund is By Rodin of course.
Sorry to add a daft comment but he looks like he is hailing a taxi.
Did the original by Rodin have anything in the hands?

Jeaentte
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Phil Minchinton



Joined: 02 Mar 2009
Posts: 190
Location: London, UK

PostPosted: Fri Mar 12, 2010 6:14 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Jeanette, an interesting juxtapostion of images. Without having access to the artist and their motivation in creating aspects of the form, are we being unfair or just representing a conservative establishment view of those who push the envelope ? The only reason I ask is that if these works were attributed to ancient times, would we be so critical? Don't worry I haven't changed my position, just playing Devil's advocate Twisted Evil
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Joel Levinson



Joined: 18 Apr 2009
Posts: 111
Location: Long Branch, New Jersey

PostPosted: Fri Mar 12, 2010 9:55 pm    Post subject: Onward Reply with quote

Phil,
I think you have a point.Rodin was probably reacting to the status quo (The Salon,etc.) as were the Impresionists,leading to cubism,synthetic cubism,abstrations,and,the final straw,Pollack.
Some time ago I posed a question which wasn't answered.However,I would really like to understand a progression and would appreciate the imput of the members here,including the younger participants.If the aforementioned artists were reacting to the status quo in their time is it possible we are seeing a reaction to the current status quo.Please forgive my ignorance as I'm not certain I have the the proper titles for the different forms.It seems there is a trend especially among the younger sculptors to photo realism in conventional materials.Then you have the the pieces which are cast in flesh like materials,flesh tone,with false eyes.hair plugs etc.It seems to me the more the experts in these forms get, the less personal identity they have,the less distinguishable their work.I know that scale,pose,subject matter can enter into this,but,I'm speaking of the actual modeling ,and, style.Artists have always been independent,proud sob's,trying to deveolop their own style,or,language.
I'm wondering how others view this.Even with the rest of us if we all begin to treat texture,hair,proportions etc.the same the best will become less individual .
So are the younger sculptors reacting to the looseness,the stylization,the alternate and the abstraction and trying to be different from the recent status quo by creating photo like perfection?Will they ultimately be satisfied if they lose a descernable individuality?Or,are we living in times where that isn't valued?
Joel
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Jeanette Lewis



Joined: 13 Oct 2009
Posts: 595
Location: Merseyside U.K.

PostPosted: Fri Mar 12, 2010 10:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi Phil,
thats o.k. I thought perhaps I would be viewed as Philistine for the two images... Smile...but if it enables further exploration that's good.
With these particular images - no one can deny its a "religious" as well as historical subject.
With most faith structures evil = dischord and disharmony , the
good = concord and harmony.
Because of its disjointedness I could not perceive that his aim in producing this peice had any higher religious thought or motivation behind it .
It had a "restless spirit which if you look at those life like Buddahs posted elswhere on the site, they are (very eerie to me; but )"Calm."
My ruminations seemed to bare this out when I read the following:-
Quote:
"I had made the St. John to refute [the charges of casting from a model], but it only partially succeeded. To prove completely that I could model from life as well as other sculptors"

I just saw his " walking man" and the anatomy on that did not succeed prove to me he was as adept as some other sculptors.
He was born just 40 years after the French revolution, so the ideas of modernism explored through the medium of art would still be in infancy?
He seems to have been one of those fore-runners who experiment at the beinning of a movement and don't quite hit the mark - but are necessary to enable others to follow and hone the quintesentials into a style.
I don't know if his experimentation with materials re;- forming a realistic representation were ever resolved within himself to his own satisfaction.

Jeaentte- .
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Stuart



Joined: 29 Nov 2006
Posts: 834

PostPosted: Sat Mar 13, 2010 5:24 am    Post subject: back to Reply with quote

Interesting stuff Jeanette and Phil!

Back to super realism for a moment.
I can remember the time just before the 'recent' interest in this genre.
I was already a sculptor at the wax museum. For me it was a great opportunity to develop and explore my craft as I hadn't had any formal training, but everyone else had gone the traditional route, knew their anatomy and did some great stuff.
Interestingly they didn't consider the waxworks art, although everyone knew of course that the methods employed and the knowledge required, were the same as for regular portraiture.
Some of them had a special pride in good results, but for most it was a meal ticket.
Techniques were improved, photography was developed to a high level to avoid distortion and measuring by some was taken to a phenomenal place.
Most pecualiarly, super-accuracy did not necessarily produce the best waxwork which confounded the measurement freaks and the management. The best portraits had the special ingredient that was difficult to name.
We talked endlessly about all the above aspects and (why waxworks continued to be so popular generation after generation). It wasn't until much later that I started to realise that it must have something to do with the difference between static, and alive and moving.
We don't see all the detail when we look at people and even when we're up close we don't look at the whole face. The way someone stands has a lot to do with it, and I used to say it's easy to recognise someone at a hundred yards on a foggy day, just by their stance
It was odd, when these so-called artists (britpack etc.) started to visit the waxworks looking for people to make their 'art' and most of us told them to go away in elizabethan language. There were some with young families who took the work of course.
All comes down to taste I suppose at the end of the day and then there is fashion in art like every other aspect of life.
I'm stuck in the past and feel that the high point of sculpted human portraiture lies back in the 30's 40's and 50's. Good examples on my website. Work that truly inspired me. Enough waffle from me for a saturday morning!
S
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website
Jeanette Lewis



Joined: 13 Oct 2009
Posts: 595
Location: Merseyside U.K.

PostPosted: Sat Mar 13, 2010 7:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

This thread has reminded me that I went to Barcelona when it was the "City of Culture". I viewed some of Rodin's work in a gallery there (I can't recall the name of!)
I do like some of his works, but they tend to be those with some poetry to them. Every now and again its like things he does just don't work . Maybe his reputation, and being flavour of the month gave him the freedom to not give a fig if people liked it or not.. Perhaps it would be bought and hailed as a success anyway!

As to your question, Phil - about " would we be so critical if these were ancient pieces?"
Well, probably yes - Wink
If we want to improve our eye, looking at " good" examples must be more benficial than absorbing that which is poorly done? I found the image of the gold figure quite by accident - but it sprung to mind that it would make an interesting comparison. (I can only find that the baptistry piece was done prior to 1758 - so it pre-dates Rodin.)
My subjective view is that it is o.k. to judge things, (in a considered way, not rashly- Smile )because if we don't use the faculty we can never use it to make an assessment and put things right. I like to think of the ability to judge as a neutral power of man - neither conservative or liberal... unless preconditioned!
Do you agree???
Jeanette
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    portrait-sculpture.com Forum Index -> Internet Cafe All times are GMT - 7 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
Page 2 of 3

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group