search  current discussion  categories  philosophy 

more form

updated thu 5 apr 01

 

artimater on fri 30 mar 01


Yeah I think I would have sided with the nice tits(could I get a =
definition)....But really I'm just a fool for a pretty face and long =
legs.....Guess this type of form might be subjective also huh?

"Science is what you know, Philosophy is what you don't know" -Bertrand =
Russell
-artimator
"I only indulge when I've seen a snake, so I keep a supply of =
indulgences and snakes handy"
http://www.geocities.com/artimator/index.html

iandol on tue 3 apr 01


Dear Vince Pitelka,

I whole heartedly endorse your position on this topic as stated in your =
post.

One point which I think has been missing from this debate is an =
exploration of the term "Form" My own view is that it comprises the =
entirety of the elements which contribute to a work, and in the case of =
three dimensional objects, perhaps even the space which surrounds or =
penetrates them.

So far, discussion seems to be limited to "Shape" and "Surface". When =
the other elements are brought into the vision of clay artists and =
exploited then your view <"And just to knock around an old but not dead =
issue, the human race is just barely beginning to explore pottery form. =
The possibilities are unlimited."> may be realised.

Thank you for your well reasoned contribution.

Best regards,

Ivor Lewis, Redhill, South Australia