| Subject | : | Thoughtless "Appreciation"? |
| Author | : | Marla Mallett |
| Date | : | 07-30-2000 on 05:07 p.m. |
| marlam@mindspring.com Sam, You say, "understanding has nothing to do with art appreciation." Can you deny that immersion and study within any visual arts field make one more perceptive--more aware of quality? Thus more appreciative? Is the intellect not involved in such a process of self education? Only emotion? Can you possibly believe that significant works of art demand no thought? On the part of both the creator and audience? Can you possibly doubt that serious artists struggle to distill ideas and present them in effective visual form? If the intellect is central to the process of creation, how can one justify recommending that viewers react only emotionally? I, for one, have found that the thrills inherent in the creative process sometimes result from an intuitive approach, but that significant discoveries and solutions more often are the product of long, hard thought and critical evaluation. A casual viewer may envision a succession of emotional outbursts by a painter, and remain blissfully unaware of the long hours spent by him or her in the studio contemplating the work--refining, revamping, or even abandoning cherished ideas to begin again. Rarely is the intended "communication" in any visual art purely "emotional" and anyone approaching an art or craft product in such a way must surely miss a great deal. The creative processes in weaving are certainly more constrained than those enjoyed by the painter. The processes offer fewer opportunities for major changes once a work is underway. But these processes certainly allow the weaver thinking time! Lots of time to comtemplate the course of the work and perhaps plot new directions for the next. I can't imagine anyone who has spent 8 or 10 hours a day weaving--day after day, year after year--applying primarily emotional standards when assessing (or simply "appreciating") anyone else's woven production. Fiber works, in fact, may be more cerebral than production in any other visual arts medium. This issue has nothing to do with fashion or style. Intellectual content remains a "basic aspect of humanity" conveyed by fiber art just as surely as any purely emotional element. |
| Subject | : | RE:Thoughtless |
| Author | : | Marvin Amstey |
| Date | : | 07-31-2000 on 01:46 p.m. |
| mamstey1@rochester.rr.com Right on, Marla! Regards, Marvin |
| Subject | : | RE:Thoughtless |
| Author | : | Sam Gorden |
| Date | : | 08-01-2000 on 01:40 p.m. |
| Dear Marla. Certainly,"immersion and study within any visual field makes one more perceptive-more aware of quality" This requires effort on the part of the afficionado. This includes greed as evinced by the many promotions which infest our field. All motivated by the ancient adage, Buy Cheap, Sell Dear! Recently, I found an old book in my closet, "Teppiche Die Bilder Des Orients" by E.Engels in which the author completely expressed my FEELINGS on the subject. He did it so beautifully that I will quote him here. "The work of art 'appeals to you' if it strikes a subconcious chord in your being. This subjective EMOTION must precede any attempt to discover the essence of the carpet's expressive power. It is the start of the subtle relationship which develops between your Oriental carpet and yourself. The carpet was created by people of another culture who know the power of suggestion. The sensitive the observer the more receptive he is to the expressiveness of abstrct and inter-related ornamentation. It loosens the bond of mundane reality and opens the way to the unknown part of our being-whose musicality unfolds in the same measure as we are willing to give ourselves up to it. THE FLYING CARPET IS NOT JUST A FAIRY TALE. IT IS UP TO US WHETHER IT GIVES WINGS TO OUR FANCY OR REMAINS A FLOOR COVERING!" (My emphasis). Here Engels said it all!! Assuredly,there is no better reason for collecting. Sam |
| Subject | : | RE:Thoughtless |
| Author | : | Marla Mallett |
| Date | : | 08-02-2000 on 10:32 a.m. |
| marlam@mindspring.com Sam, I do not understand: How do efforts on the part of rug afficionados to become more perceptive and thus more appreciative of fiber art forms "include greed as evidenced by the many promotions which infect our field"? What's the connection? Your Engels quote focuses on a "work of art that 'appeals to you'" because it "strikes a subconscious chord in your being." I suggest that this attraction--one you described before as "Love at first sight"--is unlikely to be as deep or enduring as more gradually and thoughtfully acquired passions. We need only envision the typical early rug purchases of enthusiastic new collectors. Surely these products--perhaps displayed later with embarrassment--"Gladdened the heart," as you've said, at least for a while. Yet this initial infatuation has often proved unsatisfying. I suggest that it is usually by thoughtful and critical contemplation that abstract, non-ideational, formal content is accessed (the intellectual component of aesthetics), and our sensitivities heightened. Though this aspect of aesthetics requires far more than emotional reactions, it has nothing to do with rug world fixations on making attributions, identifying knots, or cataloguing motifs. Those are exercises of another sort entirely. Sorry, but I'm afraid that your quote sounds like a mere excuse for those too lazy to apply critical faculties. It's a great promotional piece. How nice it would be if the greatest rewards were achieved with no effort! And if this is indeed the way it works, why isn't a much greater percentage of our population in love with the most fabulous weavings? How does one become a "more sensitive observor" who can be "more receptive to the expressiveness of abstract and inter-related ornamentation"? You mean if one doesn't already have this capacity, it's hopeless? The more passive you are, the more likely you are to "get it"? How about the rewards that come with discovering what informed the artistic production of human beings from alien cultures--aesthetics that initially may be unfamiliar and thus not immediately comfortable? Products that don't immediately thrill us and "give wings to our fancy"? Should we happily settle only for commercial rug production that was specifically taylored to suit Western tastes--"flying carpets" with non-objectionable color and designs just a tad exotic, that can fit the decor nicely and not offend our friends' sensibilities? Comfortable like a Norman Rockwell calendar? Is it not more rewarding to stretch our brains by attempting to absorb aesthetic concepts developed by human beings with vastly different backgrounds of experience and different sets of values? Exactly those works of fiber art which DO NOT immediately "strike a subconscious cord"? I'm willing to bet that nearly every serious collector can cite examples of how his or her tastes and infatuations have changed over the years--examples of works that he at first rejected, then only gradually learned to love. |
| Subject | : | The Psychological Aspects Of Appreciation |
| Author | : | Sam Gorden |
| Date | : | 08-02-2000 on 07:39 p.m. |
| Dear Marla, I did not realize that you, a neophyte compared to me, a veteran of fifty years, did not see the relationship between "Promotion and Greed". Promotion is a methodology, usually by a group, to develop popularity and high value for a category of objects which, at the present, do not enjoy these virtues. The sponsors of this process, invariably do so in the hope of financial gain. I CALL THIS HOPE "GREED". It has been used by various entities such as museums, dealers, collectors, rug cliques, etc. The basic idea is to "BUY CHEAP SELL DEAR!" Let us return to the paramount issue at stake. My basic contention is that everything we do has its inception and is determined by our emotions. The latter provides the psychic energy for our efforts to achieve "Understanding" or "Learning" if you would rather accept the latter. The resulting pleasure which is derived results from the creation of the former. Without it, there can be no interest and consequently no learning. I am glad that we agree to disagree. You have forced me to use "My Little Gray Cells!"; for which I am grateful. However, we have become involved in, what is essentially a psychological subject. It would be nice if some rug-lover who is also a psychologist, would add a commentary. You have indicated, in previous correspondence,that you give rug talks. It is thought that a debate on the foregoing before an enterprising club would be of interest and benefit for all concerned. What do you think?? All the best to you, thou good and loyal adversary. Sam |
| Subject | : | RE:Thoughtless |
| Author | : | R. John Howe |
| Date | : | 08-03-2000 on 07:16 a.m. |
| Dear Marla and Sam - There is a famous quote from philosophy asserting
approximately that "reason is the slave of the emotions," and one can
point to lots of intances that seem to support that. Alternatively and in
support of what both of you have said, perhaps, the striking of an
emotional chord is a necessary condition of aesthetic appreciation but
that the full realization of one's potential in this area requires
intellectual study. These conversations are useful for letting us get
better acquainted. I especially like Marla's sentence suggesting that love
at first sight is unlikely to realized at the levels achieved by passions
built up in an extended engagement and relationship. I would never have
guessed that she might be in favor of arranged marriages. |