search  current discussion  categories  techniques - misc 

art/calligraphy/2

updated sun 22 aug 04

 

mel jacobson on wed 18 aug 04


the folks that i was talking with were several
of the finest calligraphers in the world...charles
pearce for example....written three books, and
without question, one of the finest lettering artists on
this planet.

the real basis of our question is:

when does one bend the rules,
before you learn how to use your craft, or after?

that is what makes us smile.

a person that has been making pots for one year...
hardly knows how to throw, fire or make a glaze is
off and running....experiments in breaking rules.
`what rules?` if you don't know what you are doing,
how can you break rules? you must have a modicum of
experience before you even know the rules.

when one shows at a calligraphy exhibit, with folks that
are a bit green...how can they just scribble on paper
with a pen and call it calligraphy? it is not.
it is scribbles. but, they say...`hey, i saw that in
calligraphy review..i can do that too.` and, of course they can.
but, it is still nothing.

if nils lou makes loppy pots, well we know he is experimenting.
he is over 70, been making pots for 55 years, and has skill
up the butt. he can break all the rules he wants. he is a master
artist/craftsman.
if someone copies his loppy pots and exhibits them...what
have they done?....cloned his work. fakes. and, we all know
the difference...fake is fake. it does not take much to
recognize it. fraud is fraud.

the great teabowl masters of japan were great throwers.
the best. no one ever thought they lacked skill because
they threw loppy teabowls. all knew they were working an
idea in obtuse/asymmetrical design. how does one that has
been making pots for 6 months make teabowls? no clue.
`hey, i saw a picture of one, i can do that too.`

again, i do not wish to take anyones right to make any kind
of work they want. if one wants to scribble and exhibit it, so
be it. be my guest. just don't assume anyone is going to
like it. or give a damn.

of course one of the problems with the pc world is that folks will
say `oh, your work is lovely, so much work...oh, i wish i was
talented.....`and then get in the car and say...`good god that
was a trash exhibit.` happens every day.

skill is learned, experience is earned. there is no way to
get it fast. wish there was.
some with amazing skill and intelligence can learn it fast.
and, most often they know the difference between their work
and others. they take and use, but are not fakes. we all
look and see others work...great potters copy great potters.
suck it in. make if a part of our life. absorption. it is how many
of us learn.

i still contend that art without skill, learning, intelligence is just
junk. experience, learning, skill development is critical.
does one play the violin for six months and expect to play in
the new york philharmonic? amazing how artists think if they can
just do something different or new./...it has to be good.
mel

From:
Minnetonka, Minnesota, U.S.A.
web site: my.pclink.com/~melpots
or try: http://www.pclink.com/melpots
new/ http://www.rid-a-tick.com

Kathy Forer on wed 18 aug 04


On Aug 18, 2004, at 6:12 PM, mel jacobson wrote:

> the real basis of our question is:
>
> when does one bend the rules,
> before you learn how to use your craft, or after?
>
> that is what makes us smile.

Yes.
But whose rules, and what rules?

It's not as though standard prescriptions are etched in titanium and
never change. Formal authority is fluid and responsive to innovation,
or at least it should be.

Technical innovations revise rules as much as creative innovations do.

One can play by one set of rules that are broken in another realm. And
though PCness emphasizes a relativistic value system, there are some
common rules, though these are subject to change as well.

While most, to my mind, of the older enduring skills and training in
art is useful, and much of the new stuff is simply crap, or more
politely wasted effort, there's reason for both. I had a pretty formal
traditional training in anatomy, drawing, modeling and the like, but I
never studied from a corpse or did dissections as other figurative
artists have. I did find myself caught off guard when some more
innovative tradition-blasters gave exercises that depending entirely on
spontaneous response. And was intrigued. As a result of my interest in
generally disparate directions, my "rules" are a bit of a smorgasbord.

Look what happened to writing after James Joyce. And now with the
computer. The kind of shorthand used on this list, for instance, would
never have flown in Victorian England. That's not, again, to say there
aren't certain commonly-accepted rules of grammar, but even that
changes as language develops.

Yes, "after" is the best time. But there needs to be open choice for
the 'before'.

The analogy of the artist to surgeon is an apt one. First the surgeon
becomes a doctor, then learns surgery skill, holding the book in hand.
Then the book is let go, put in the surgeon's library for consultation,
and he is ready to operate. To wing it, even. Hopefully having
internalized the body of knowledge and technique he originally set out
to learn. Then he specializes or generalizes. Either one leads to a
personal synthesis.

Kathy Forer
www.kforer.com

Ivor and Olive Lewis on thu 19 aug 04


Dear Mel,
Thanks for your reply.
You say ...."the real basis of our question is: when does one bend the
rules, before you learn how to use your craft, or after? that is what
makes us smile.".....
No argument with that. Nature has littered the crust of the Earth
with remnants, fossils if you will, that forgot to get the processes
well honed before trying to evolve. Hang around long enough, those
exhibits and the people who created them will become part of the
detritus of (Artistic) evolution, or lead a "Revolution".
So, as a rule what are the....."Rules".....
Best regards,
Ivor Lewis.
Redhill,
S. Australia.




----- Original Message -----
From: "mel jacobson"
To:
Sent: Thursday, 19 August 2004 7:42
Subject: art/calligraphy/2


> the folks that i was talking with were several
> of the finest calligraphers in the world...charles
> pearce for example....written three books, and
> without question, one of the finest lettering artists on
> this planet.
>
> the real basis of our question is:
>
> when does one bend the rules,
> before you learn how to use your craft, or after?
>
> that is what makes us smile.
>
> a person that has been making pots for one year...
> hardly knows how to throw, fire or make a glaze is
> off and running....experiments in breaking rules.
> `what rules?` if you don't know what you are doing,
> how can you break rules? you must have a modicum of
> experience before you even know the rules.
>
> when one shows at a calligraphy exhibit, with folks that
> are a bit green...how can they just scribble on paper
> with a pen and call it calligraphy? it is not.
> it is scribbles. but, they say...`hey, i saw that in
> calligraphy review..i can do that too.` and, of course they can.
> but, it is still nothing.
>
> if nils lou makes loppy pots, well we know he is experimenting.
> he is over 70, been making pots for 55 years, and has skill
> up the butt. he can break all the rules he wants. he is a master
> artist/craftsman.
> if someone copies his loppy pots and exhibits them...what
> have they done?....cloned his work. fakes. and, we all know
> the difference...fake is fake. it does not take much to
> recognize it. fraud is fraud.
>
> the great teabowl masters of japan were great throwers.
> the best. no one ever thought they lacked skill because
> they threw loppy teabowls. all knew they were working an
> idea in obtuse/asymmetrical design. how does one that has
> been making pots for 6 months make teabowls? no clue.
> `hey, i saw a picture of one, i can do that too.`
>
> again, i do not wish to take anyones right to make any kind
> of work they want. if one wants to scribble and exhibit it, so
> be it. be my guest. just don't assume anyone is going to
> like it. or give a damn.
>
> of course one of the problems with the pc world is that folks will
> say `oh, your work is lovely, so much work...oh, i wish i was
> talented.....`and then get in the car and say...`good god that
> was a trash exhibit.` happens every day.
>
> skill is learned, experience is earned. there is no way to
> get it fast. wish there was.
> some with amazing skill and intelligence can learn it fast.
> and, most often they know the difference between their work
> and others. they take and use, but are not fakes. we all
> look and see others work...great potters copy great potters.
> suck it in. make if a part of our life. absorption. it is how
many
> of us learn.
>
> i still contend that art without skill, learning, intelligence is
just
> junk. experience, learning, skill development is critical.
> does one play the violin for six months and expect to play in
> the new york philharmonic? amazing how artists think if they can
> just do something different or new./...it has to be good.
> mel
>
> From:
> Minnetonka, Minnesota, U.S.A.
> web site: my.pclink.com/~melpots
> or try: http://www.pclink.com/melpots
> new/ http://www.rid-a-tick.com
>
>
______________________________________________________________________
________
> Send postings to clayart@lsv.ceramics.org
>
> You may look at the archives for the list or change your
subscription
> settings from http://www.ceramics.org/clayart/
>
> Moderator of the list is Mel Jacobson who may be reached at
melpots@pclink.com.

Kathy Forer on thu 19 aug 04


Just a note of clarification about my previous remark. I believe that
spontaneity is the result of hard work and assimilation of artisanry.
Endless practice and study is a better use of time and effort than any
shortcut or semblance of freshness. However, there are exercises and
ways to approach seeing and making that are more effective at freeing
expression than more academic routines.

My point about rules changing is simply that as boundaries between
disciplines become more fluid, we need to respect the possibilities
inherent in their various realignments as well as observe their
disintegrations and dissolution.

Kathy Forer
www.foreverink.com

claybair on thu 19 aug 04


Mel,

My first class in clay after getting help centering
a fist sized piece of clay I opened it wonderfully.
I thought.... "This is a piece of cake!"
I then spent the next year trying to do the same thing!:-)
Beginners luck led to intense study, practice
then experience.
I see the sequence as
dumb luck, study then becoming
so proficient it becomes automatic.
It becomes part of one's mental and physical state.
At this point one doesn't have to think about
it and one's hands know exactly what to do.

So as far as I am concerned the beginner might
have a moment of dumb luck and lacking knowledge
does not understand the mechanics, rules and
will be unable to duplicate it.

Now..... on the other hand... depending on what one believes....
drawing on previous life skills produce
child genius', idiot savants... whatever labels apply.
That's the only way I can I explain
a 2 yr old child masterfully playing classical music.
Somehow, someway these little genius' know the rules but
sometimes they later lose it.

I don't know... give me some soup (quote from the movie "Toys")

Gayle Bair
Bainbridge Island, WA
http://claybair.com

-----Original Message-----
From: mel jacobson
snip>
the real basis of our question is:

when does one bend the rules,
before you learn how to use your craft, or after?

that is what makes us smile.

a person that has been making pots for one year...
hardly knows how to throw, fire or make a glaze is
off and running....experiments in breaking rules.
`what rules?` if you don't know what you are doing,
how can you break rules? you must have a modicum of
experience before you even know the rules.

when one shows at a calligraphy exhibit, with folks that
are a bit green...how can they just scribble on paper
with a pen and call it calligraphy? it is not.
it is scribbles. but, they say...`hey, i saw that in
calligraphy review..i can do that too.` and, of course they can.
but, it is still nothing.

if nils lou makes loppy pots, well we know he is experimenting.
he is over 70, been making pots for 55 years, and has skill
up the butt. he can break all the rules he wants. he is a master
artist/craftsman.
if someone copies his loppy pots and exhibits them...what
have they done?....cloned his work. fakes. and, we all know
the difference...fake is fake. it does not take much to
recognize it. fraud is fraud.

the great teabowl masters of japan were great throwers.
the best. no one ever thought they lacked skill because
they threw loppy teabowls. all knew they were working an
idea in obtuse/asymmetrical design. how does one that has
been making pots for 6 months make teabowls? no clue.
`hey, i saw a picture of one, i can do that too.`

again, i do not wish to take anyones right to make any kind
of work they want. if one wants to scribble and exhibit it, so
be it. be my guest. just don't assume anyone is going to
like it. or give a damn.

of course one of the problems with the pc world is that folks will
say `oh, your work is lovely, so much work...oh, i wish i was
talented.....`and then get in the car and say...`good god that
was a trash exhibit.` happens every day.

skill is learned, experience is earned. there is no way to
get it fast. wish there was.
some with amazing skill and intelligence can learn it fast.
and, most often they know the difference between their work
and others. they take and use, but are not fakes. we all
look and see others work...great potters copy great potters.
suck it in. make if a part of our life. absorption. it is how many
of us learn.

i still contend that art without skill, learning, intelligence is just
junk. experience, learning, skill development is critical.
does one play the violin for six months and expect to play in
the new york philharmonic? amazing how artists think if they can
just do something different or new./...it has to be good.
mel

From:
Minnetonka, Minnesota, U.S.A.
web site: my.pclink.com/~melpots
or try: http://www.pclink.com/melpots
new/ http://www.rid-a-tick.com

Vince Pitelka on fri 20 aug 04


> No argument with that. Nature has littered the crust of the Earth
> with remnants, fossils if you will, that forgot to get the processes
> well honed before trying to evolve. Hang around long enough, those
> exhibits and the people who created them will become part of the
> detritus of (Artistic) evolution, or lead a "Revolution".
> So, as a rule what are the....."Rules".....

Excellent, Ivor. Thank you for that. I have made the same point before,
though not as elegantly as you. The examples of fine craft that exhibit
shoddy technique and/or workmanship are generally fairly obvious, and will
not endure. It is not so simple in traditional fine art media. As we have
seen, armchair critics and so-called experts waste a whole lot of time
trying to categorically state which examples of contemporary art are good,
and which are not. But to say that a certain example of contemporary art is
of "enduring" significance is presumptuous until it has, in fact, endured
the test of time. All we can do is make our best guess based on our own
objective and subjective response. If everyone could just remember that
their opinion of a certain work of art is just that, an individual opinion,
we'd have an easier time comparing our views on contemporary art.

It is pretty safe to say that the examples of calligraphy that Mel refers
to - some of the finest being done today - will endure. Perhaps that is
part of the beauty of fine craft - when the technique and workmanship are so
flawless and inspired, it is immediately evident to anyone of discerning eye
and taste, and we can be pretty damn sure that the work WILL endure the test
of time. There are no such guarantees in leading-edge, risk-taking drawing,
painting, sculpture, etc., regardless of the immediate impact of the work.

In fine craft, the work of the master craftsperson stands out clearly from
the work of an amateur, but in contemporary abstract and expressionistic
art, sometimes it IS hard to tell the difference between the work of an
inspired and adventurous beginning painter or sculptor, and the evolving
work of a seasoned master. You can see this happening all the time in any
good art school. It is impossible to predict which work will endure.
- Vince

Vince Pitelka
Appalachian Center for Craft, Tennessee Technological University
Smithville TN 37166, 615/597-6801 x111
vpitelka@dtccom.net, wpitelka@tntech.edu
http://iweb.tntech.edu/wpitelka/
http://www.tntech.edu/craftcenter/