Re: lexicon

----- Original Message -----
From: "J Y S Czhang" <czhang23@...>

> In a message dated 2003:06:01 11:27:16 AM, the esteemed Sally Caves
writes:
>
> > [ . . . ] Now there is elegant and vulgar art--degrees of
> >discipline not easily mastered by the amateur
>
>     It is not so black and white of course.
I didn't intend it to be black and white.  Of course I know about the shades
of gray in between.  I admire children's art, folk art, I try to do it; and
whoever says that the art of the insane is "unprofessional" or "unrefined"
Some of these people ARE artists, and sell their work.  At least print the
whole paragraph I wrote instead of excerpting a clause out of it.  I, for
instance, don't think I have the skill to create the kind of pottery my
mother does, for instance.  I'm an amateur, she's a professional.  Her
forearms are powerful from the constant throwing on the wheel she does.  I
don't think I have the skill to play on the piano the way Josef Verba does
in Rochester.  I'm an amateur, he's a professional.  I can still amuse
myself with my nervous Chick Corea and some of the ditties I make up.
That's what I meant.

Some "amateur" art has just much
> if not more elegance and/or discipline than so-call "professional" or
"fine"
> art. Several cases in point: folk art; children's art; art created by the
> insane... _art brut_... and, stretching a tiny wee bit, the art of
sentient animals
> (hey there's some really fantastic Jackson-Pollock-like paintings done
by -
> IIRC - one of the San Diego Zoo chimpanzees that are waaaaay cheaper than
any
> Pollock and more colourful in a cheery way).
Read Michael Poxon's remark about animal art, posted yesterday.

> > I won't deny that--but on almost every level, our lives are enriched by
> some form >of art... our defense against "wilderness."
>
>     "Our"? Who is "we" in this case?
The whole human race.  Who else?  Unless  you think that by "art" I mean,
incredibly and stupidly, only American art.  Or "The Mona Lisa."

> Perhaps "defense against wilderness" is
> one of Western Civilisation's many chthonic preoccupations.
The English word "art" itself is related to "artifice," that is, nurture,
instead of "nature."  And btw, "art" as you seem to imply above isn't
confined to "western civilization."  We're back to the Mona Lisa again,
aren't we? :)  I'm a great admirer of Japanese art.  And pre-Columbian.  And
Inuit.

Sally Caves
scaves@frontiernet.net
Eskkoat ol ai sendran, rohsan nuehra celyil takrem bomai nakuo.
"My shadow follows me, putting strange, new roses into the world."