• OK, it's on.
  • Please note that many, many Email Addresses used for spam, are not accepted at registration. Select a respectable Free email.
  • Done now. Domine miserere nobis.

Let's talk about art!

Happy

sorry for english
Local time
Today 3:51 PM
Joined
Apr 26, 2013
Messages
1,336
-->
Location
Yes
What are your thoughts on art?

This thread is not intended to discuss a certain aspect, but rather a free for all. Feel free to discuss anything, but please remember that art has been around for thousands of years and has developed many different styles, schools of thought and definitions.
 

onesteptwostep

Junior Hegelian
Local time
Today 1:51 PM
Joined
Dec 7, 2014
Messages
4,253
-->
Hmm I was at a retreat organization once and I met some single doctor lady who told me art was just a product of struggle. Apparently she painted when she was going through a hard time in life. If you think about it it's somewhat true. Art that resonates comes from hardship, or portrays hardship. The abstract ones we have today have no impact, or else they're just elegant maths (like surrealism, deconstructive, MC Escher stuff)

I think generally, after WW2, art's been like this, since it was generally a form of high culture.
 

Rook

enter text
Local time
Today 6:51 AM
Joined
Aug 14, 2013
Messages
2,545
-->
Location
look at flag
(Seeing as this thread is within the visual sphere of things, my post has attained a semblance of redundancy)



I find myself drawn to music and literature, other forms such as visual and theatrical art hold less appeal when compared to the staggering complexity of The Outside:

bush squirrels in a marula, the mists rolling in from the mountains and the moon painted orange as it rotates by.


{I have an appreciation for well done clay sculptures though, they can be made quite vibrantly alive under the right hands}
 

Urakro

~
Local time
Today 4:51 AM
Joined
Sep 7, 2015
Messages
466
-->
(Please excuse my mild temporary dyslexia, honestly I can't help it)

I'm finding visual painting/drawing just as fascinating as music. But all art seems to be a way of translating something inside the artist that words alone can't. Good art is initially made for the artist and not originally intended for the audience, and it was used to explore a thought, idea, or feeling subjective to the artist.

The big question is what is it about art that makes it pleasing? Yes, including paintings of landscapes, and then abstracts, but it also reaches a much more wider scope of applications, not excluding symbols and logos, photography, fonts, and even work memos.

Visual art has some similarities to music such as that it has structure, and some form of playful consistency, and sharing similar attributes such as contrast, fullness, texture, and a focal point.

A reoccurring thing about professional art is that the artist will have a strong tendency to put the focal point near a 'phi' of the view-port or canvas. I've noticed this with movies, where the film maker will have a strong tendency to put the focus either direct center, or at the golden ratio line of the screen. But just using phi alone will hardly guarantee attractiveness.

Using a combination of interesting palettes, transitions, a path that captures the audience into the art's unified culmination, and then allowing a safe release and exit while leaving behind an indescribable souvenir to ponder with are only some of the effects found in a masterpiece.
 

Cherry Cola

Banned
Local time
Today 4:51 AM
Joined
Mar 17, 2013
Messages
3,899
-->
Location
stockholm
I find it strange that people are more into music than visual art considering humans and primates in general are visual animals.
 

Happy

sorry for english
Local time
Today 3:51 PM
Joined
Apr 26, 2013
Messages
1,336
-->
Location
Yes
Hmm I was at a retreat organization once and I met some single doctor lady who told me art was just a product of struggle. Apparently she painted when she was going through a hard time in life. If you think about it it's somewhat true. Art that resonates comes from hardship, or portrays hardship. The abstract ones we have today have no impact, or else they're just elegant maths (like surrealism, deconstructive, MC Escher stuff)

I think generally, after WW2, art's been like this, since it was generally a form of high culture.
I'd argue that art that holds the most meaning speaks for a generation or, more specifically, a demographic. Your doctor lady's definition fits within the scope of my umbrella classification. For instance, modernism in art (I'm speaking of 20th century modernism - De Stijl, Bauhaus, Abstract Expressionism, etc.) was somewhat a revolution, during and following times of turmoil. As an example, the Bauhaus school was opened in Weimar, Germany in 1919, in the year following the conclusion of the first world war, after being conceived by Walter Gropius while he fought in the war.
(Seeing as this thread is within the visual sphere of things, my post has attained a semblance of redundancy)



I find myself drawn to music and literature, other forms such as visual and theatrical art hold less appeal when compared to the staggering complexity of The Outside:

bush squirrels in a marula, the mists rolling in from the mountains and the moon painted orange as it rotates by.


{I have an appreciation for well done clay sculptures though, they can be made quite vibrantly alive under the right hands}
I don't understand. Why should the visual and theatrical arts be dwarfed by music and literature? They don't do any better in comprehending the complexity of our existence. They only do it differently. I'd like to hear what you have to say.
(Please excuse my mild temporary dyslexia, honestly I can't help it)

I'm finding visual painting/drawing just as fascinating as music. But all art seems to be a way of translating something inside the artist that words alone can't. Good art is initially made for the artist and not originally intended for the audience, and it was used to explore a thought, idea, or feeling subjective to the artist.

The big question is what is it about art that makes it pleasing? Yes, including paintings of landscapes, and then abstracts, but it also reaches a much more wider scope of applications, not excluding symbols and logos, photography, fonts, and even work memos.

Visual art has some similarities to music such as that it has structure, and some form of playful consistency, and sharing similar attributes such as contrast, fullness, texture, and a focal point.

A reoccurring thing about professional art is that the artist will have a strong tendency to put the focal point near a 'phi' of the view-port or canvas. I've noticed this with movies, where the film maker will have a strong tendency to put the focus either direct center, or at the golden ratio line of the screen. But just using phi alone will hardly guarantee attractiveness.

Using a combination of interesting palettes, transitions, a path that captures the audience into the art's unified culmination, and then allowing a safe release and exit while leaving behind an indescribable souvenir to ponder with are only some of the effects found in a masterpiece.
I agree with the majority of your post here, but I'm having difficulty with the focus that you're describing. I mean, that's true for some forms, especially portraits and most landscapes, but it's certainly not a universal rule - particularly post-1900.
In saying that, you're right, it's definitely true in the medium of film, but that, I think is part of the restrictions the medium puts on the expression. Which is one thing I really like about film.
I find it strange that people are more into music than visual art considering humans and primates in general are visual animals.
Me too. Maybe it's because music doesn't need your full attention to be appreciated? Like, if you're looking at a painting or something, your primary sense (sight) is preoccupied with that, but if you're listening to music, you can be doing just about anything else concurrently.
 

Ex-User (9086)

Prolific Member
Local time
Today 4:51 AM
Joined
Nov 21, 2013
Messages
4,758
-->
I second Rook. I'm rarely drawn to visual arts, most of the time I spend with art is with music and literature, I enjoy these media more overall.

The visual medium limits my imagination, it imposes firm structures on my thinking and doesn't allow the same freedom of participation compared to others. In this sense, it's more entertaining than it is a wholesome and engaging experience.

If I were to choose between visiting art galleries or museums, or sightseeing various architectural marvels, I'd rather enjoy what the wilderness has to offer. No art can compare with the landscapes and natural wonders here on earth or the harmonious feelings I have when walking among it.
 

Rook

enter text
Local time
Today 6:51 AM
Joined
Aug 14, 2013
Messages
2,545
-->
Location
look at flag
I

I don't understand. Why should the visual and theatrical arts be dwarfed by music and literature? They don't do any better in comprehending the complexity of our existence. They only do it differently. I'd like to hear what you have to say.

Blarruan summed it up rather nicely.

Literature is far more rewarding for an active imagination, creating a world solely within one's mind and giving one the ability to pen down a reality never created before(or never before encountered by it's creator, at least).

Music may do the same at times, close your eyes and themes of great abstraction or tranquility can flow forth from music, a castle filled with strange and eldritch beings or an epic journey defying contemporary physics.

There are some albums that one can listen to in order, falling into a meditative trance while the mind.... explores and creates.

In the end, just as within the differing schools of the mediums themselves, preference for certain types of art are up to individual preference.


That being said, is there a definite answer as to what type of art humanity as a whole values the most?
 

onesteptwostep

Junior Hegelian
Local time
Today 1:51 PM
Joined
Dec 7, 2014
Messages
4,253
-->
I find it strange that people are more into music than visual art considering humans and primates in general are visual animals.

Well music you can just download or go to some event and enjoy it, and it's usually readily connected with youths (because of colleges). Art has to be packaged more in order to reach an audience (galleries, art fairs, displays in public places etc).

Here's something that might be interesting: http://www.woohnayoung.com/#!fairytales/c1tyb

I find it interesting when people mash up modern motifs with traditional ones. It gives sort of an interesting juxtaposition.

And this guy...: http://www.kimjunggius.com/collections/original-artwork
Here's more. The detail is amazing.

On an abstract level I'm fond of this person: http://www.lehmannmaupin.com/artists/do-ho-suh

The theme behind his works is supposed to showcase his longing for a 'home'. He lived in both New York and Seoul but doesn't feel comfortable in either one of them. When he's in New York, he misses Seoul, but when he's in Seoul, he misses New York. He's probably happy about the money he's made now, but yeah. His works with the satin are basically to represent the transcendence of home.
 

Happy

sorry for english
Local time
Today 3:51 PM
Joined
Apr 26, 2013
Messages
1,336
-->
Location
Yes
Literature is far more rewarding for an active imagination, creating a world solely within one's mind and giving one the ability to pen down a reality never created before(or never before encountered by it's creator, at least).

I get this kind of experience from visual art, but it's different. While I enjoy building my own mental image of the world within a literary novel, I build a similar sort of image when I analyse visual art. Only, instead of being directed outwardly and building a mental image of the world wherein the story lies, it's directed at building a mental image of the creator, the artist. I find this much more interesting and stimulating. Why did [artist] do that? What was happening in their life to make them have this perspective? What world events were shaping this artist's perspective? - that sort of thing. When I look at a painting/sculpture/whatever, I try and piece together everything that led to it.

So, I disagree that literature is more rewarding for an active imagination and argue that how one applies their imagination to an interpretation is much more pertinent.

Music may do the same at times, close your eyes and themes of great abstraction or tranquility can flow forth from music, a castle filled with strange and eldritch beings or an epic journey defying contemporary physics.

There are some albums that one can listen to in order, falling into a meditative trance while the mind.... explores and creates.

In the end, just as within the differing schools of the mediums themselves, preference for certain types of art are up to individual preference.


That being said, is there a definite answer as to what type of art humanity as a whole values the most?
I agree about the music thing. For me personally, classical music is my go-to for that feeling.

As far as what type of art humanity values the most, I don't think it's a question that has, nor needs, an answer.
 

Brontosaurie

Banned
Local time
Today 5:51 AM
Joined
Dec 4, 2010
Messages
5,646
-->
Music may do the same at times, close your eyes and themes of great abstraction or tranquility can flow forth from music, a castle filled with strange and eldritch beings or an epic journey defying contemporary physics.

I'm jelly
 

Polaris

Prolific Member
Local time
Yesterday 5:51 PM
Joined
Oct 13, 2009
Messages
2,261
-->
I have poor imagination, so for me the visual is extremely important in gaining an insight into different worlds. Literature does the same as it "paints" a picture with words. I have trouble with poetry, as interpretation is quite imaginative and subjective, whereas I tend to take something visual quite literally. Someone gave me a poetry book for my birthday once and I gracefully accepted it, later leafing through it thinking I don't understand anything, this is bollocks. I was somewhat fascinated with Sylvia Plath and William Blake when younger and I know some people I know will scoff condescendingly at this but whatever - it resonated at the time so fuck the snobs.

Later on I learnt how to interpret poetry and with this I decided it is all rubbish because if one has to learn how to interpret, then what is the point - it just seems pretentious, having to follow a recipe for how to interpret art - it should be intuitive, and if not, it's not for me.

I have written somewhat poetic things when lacking in expression myself at times, when conventional language fails and just sounds trite and redundant. Usually during times of distress, or when I experience inner peace, which is rare. I don't expect others to understand it though, but if they do - bonus. Someone recognises my experience.

I like perusing art galleries and I prefer landscapes and abstract art. I don't enjoy portraits much, they bore me for some reason. Perhaps because I struggle with eyes and facial expressions - they confuse me. Then again, people in general confuse me and the last thing I want to find in an art gallery is pictures of more bloody people, drilling their personal torment and emotion into me. I can study a portrait for it's techniques and appreciate the skill of the artist though. Certain landscapes and abstract art seem to hit a nerve in some subliminal fashion, perhaps a deep intuition that I haven't tapped into and I prefer it to remain on the level of mystery. The mystery can give me inspiration, like there are messages shrouded in some sort of code - the code seems to burn to an inner retina and stays with me in the same way music does. Music has always been my main interest, but lately I have trouble even appreciating this artform.

There just seems to be nothing new, all art seems to repeat itself through it's different forms. Perhaps I'm just jaded.
 

Cherry Cola

Banned
Local time
Today 4:51 AM
Joined
Mar 17, 2013
Messages
3,899
-->
Location
stockholm
Me too. Maybe it's because music doesn't need your full attention to be appreciated? Like, if you're looking at a painting or something, your primary sense (sight) is preoccupied with that, but if you're listening to music, you can be doing just about anything else concurrently.

That's definitely a big part of it. I wonder if its the only reason though. Hard to imagine appreciating imagery without having it require full or almost full attention. Maybe it really is the only reason.


@onesteptwostep:

I think the availability is a consequence of the level of appreciation. If people wanted to consume more visual art it'd be more readily available :O Oh and nice concept art.
 

Brontosaurie

Banned
Local time
Today 5:51 AM
Joined
Dec 4, 2010
Messages
5,646
-->
Music is of course the best since it's rhythmical like the heartbeat and like neuronal frequencies. Music beckons tribal synchronization. Music directly addresses the passage of time toward death simply by virtue of its form. Music will prompt bodies to release tensions produced by emotional trauma. Thus it is the nexus of spirit and flesh.
 

Saywhatnow

Member
Local time
Today 12:51 AM
Joined
May 31, 2016
Messages
91
-->
Location
In my head
What are your thoughts on art?

This thread is not intended to discuss a certain aspect, but rather a free for all. Feel free to discuss anything, but please remember that art has been around for thousands of years and has developed many different styles, schools of thought and definitions.

What is not art? Everything is art and we are all art on someone else's canvas.
 

bvanevery

Redshirt who doesn't die
Local time
Today 12:51 AM
Joined
Jan 3, 2016
Messages
1,480
-->
Location
Asheville, NC
Trying to debate what is bad Art, trying to provide some kind of rational, cogent, analytical, repeatable, universalist basis for it, got met with tremendous resistance in an online painting forum I used to take part of. It got so bad that I all but abandoned my social participation there. I went looking for a different community, hopefully of people who were more like-minded in their willingness to analyze and engage a subject matter in a certain way. I landed here, on the intpforum site. The Art subforum was a bit slow so I haven't had much specifically to say here.

A fair number of artists don't feel they have to justify or explain their opinions in any way. Thus their proclivities and concerns are often meaningless to certain other groups of people. They aren't even interested in verbalizing or working out why they do what they do, or how anyone reacts to it. No shock to me that the general public doesn't like a lot of these artists, and even sees them as rich pricks.
 

Happy

sorry for english
Local time
Today 3:51 PM
Joined
Apr 26, 2013
Messages
1,336
-->
Location
Yes
Trying to debate what is bad Art, trying to provide some kind of rational, cogent, analytical, repeatable, universalist basis for it, got met with tremendous resistance in an online painting forum I used to take part of. It got so bad that I all but abandoned my social participation there. I went looking for a different community, hopefully of people who were more like-minded in their willingness to analyze and engage a subject matter in a certain way. I landed here, on the intpforum site. The Art subforum was a bit slow so I haven't had much specifically to say here.

A fair number of artists don't feel they have to justify or explain their opinions in any way. Thus their proclivities and concerns are often meaningless to certain other groups of people. They aren't even interested in verbalizing or working out why they do what they do, or how anyone reacts to it. No shock to me that the general public doesn't like a lot of these artists, and even sees them as rich pricks.

That's an interesting discussion - how do you define bad art?
Would you care to share your opinion?

My immediate thought is that art without specific intent or imbued cultural meaning is not good art.

For instance, my favourite artist of all time, Wassily Kandinsky, painted mostly primary shapes, lines and squiggles. This sounds straight away to be rubbish, but there is a great deal of complexity in his paintings. The composition was very carefully thought out, and his use of form, hierarchy, space and order was exquisite. He worked extremely hard to understand the effects his shapes and colours would have on the viewer, and the way they would be interpreted as feelings. He intended to take the viewer on a journey of emotion.

Here are some examples:
kandinsky.comp-8.jpg
Yellow-Red-Blue.jpg

I can't think of any examples of bad art off the top of my head.
 

reloaded

Member
Local time
Today 4:51 AM
Joined
Jul 23, 2016
Messages
72
-->
I've never felt deeply about any artworks, and do not understand how someone can feel an "emotional connection" or whatever it is. But I'm curious how it feels like. That being said, I quite like Picasso's artworks. As for recent years, the morbid artworks I encountered on tumblr a few years back were pretty decent. When it comes to art, I'm really attracted to morbidity and complexity. Unless you're using water color (my fav), then I like a sense of human fragility in the art.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

ZenRaiden

One atom of me
Local time
Today 4:51 AM
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
4,406
-->
Location
Between concrete walls
I think best way to categorize art is by the motivations people have behind doing art.
Like you get dull academic art or you get the sort of graffity art that people make just to get noticed or sort of art where people just unleash their emotions and go full retard and no regretts.
I my self prefer the sort of art where either I wank off or do some drawing or else I get bored.
 

Cogitant

Fiducial Observer
Local time
Today 4:51 AM
Joined
Jun 8, 2017
Messages
157
-->
Location
Invading your reality
I appreciate intentionally symbolic art and clever art...
Art which is attached to thought and philosophy.

Alan Davie.
I met this guy in 2006. He's dead now.
Philosopher-artist and inspired by cubism, surrealism and the beat movement, his art was based on Jung's notion of the collective unconscious, archetypes, ancient petroglyphs and primal symbols.

[bimgx=550]http://res.cloudinary.com/jpress/image/fetch/w_700,f_auto,ar_3:2,c_fill/http://www.scotsman.com/webimage/1.3369740.1396985417!/image/2536055127.jpg[/bimgx]​

I also like Escher, I expect he's probably a favourite with all NT types.

[bimgx=550]http://britton.disted.camosun.bc.ca/escher/day_and_night.jpg[/bimgx]
Others I value include Max Ernst and the Northern Renaissance painters Jan Van Eyck and Albrecht Durer. There are many others which I cannot recall at this time.

PS. If this concerned architecture, you'd possibly get a book as a response from me ;)
 

Happy

sorry for english
Local time
Today 3:51 PM
Joined
Apr 26, 2013
Messages
1,336
-->
Location
Yes
I appreciate intentionally symbolic art and clever art...
Art which is attached to thought and philosophy.

Alan Davie.
I met this guy in 2006. He's dead now.
Philosopher-artist and inspired by cubism, surrealism and the beat movement, his art was based on Jung's notion of the collective unconscious, archetypes, ancient petroglyphs and primal symbols.

[bimgx=550]http://res.cloudinary.com/jpress/image/fetch/w_700,f_auto,ar_3:2,c_fill/http://www.scotsman.com/webimage/1.3369740.1396985417!/image/2536055127.jpg[/bimgx]​

I also like Escher, I expect he's probably a favourite with all NT types.

[bimgx=550]http://britton.disted.camosun.bc.ca/escher/day_and_night.jpg[/bimgx]
Others I value include Max Ernst and the Northern Renaissance painters Jan Van Eyck and Albrecht Durer. There are many others which I cannot recall at this time.

PS. If this concerned architecture, you'd possibly get a book as a response from me ;)

I went to an Escher exhibition in Singapore this year. All his work was there. Amazing stuff.

Also if you want to talk about architecture, go ahead. By definition, architecture IS art, and their histories are deeply intertwined. I'm an architect and I'll read your wall of text.
 

QuickTwist

Spiritual "Woo"
Local time
Yesterday 11:51 PM
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
7,182
-->
Location
...
I have a few thoughts on this that I am not sure quite how to articulate.

I believe art to be subconscious in nature rather than a conscious thing. One can learn the skills necessary to produce a work of art, but the process is incredibly intuitive and instinctive in nature rather than thought out and rational. The idea I am trying to get across is that the idea behind any piece of art dwells within the imagination and psyche of the individual creating the work of art. It is by nature, the opposite of mechanical. The mechanical use of tools producing a work of art is only the methodology rather than the product.

So when you see a piece of art, you are not even looking at the mechanical use of tools needed to produce said piece of art, but rather the idea behind said use of tools. The tools are a means to an end, but never the purpose of the art piece itself. The true purpose of the art piece is to convey a state of being that the artist experienced. The art piece is the fruition of conscious thought about the subconscious state of being the artist experienced. Art then, at its core, is the absolute state of awareness the artist has about themselves.
 

AndyC

Hm?
Local time
Today 3:51 PM
Joined
Nov 30, 2015
Messages
353
-->
'tis merely poetry, like morality and other things, a product of culture. Aesthetic has to be predictable, the patterns are a result of this. culture is what causes us to direct and receive emotions as a consequence of art.
 

Cogitant

Fiducial Observer
Local time
Today 4:51 AM
Joined
Jun 8, 2017
Messages
157
-->
Location
Invading your reality
I went to an Escher exhibition in Singapore this year. All his work was there. Amazing stuff.

So jelly of you ;)

Also if you want to talk about architecture, go ahead. By definition, architecture IS art, and their histories are deeply intertwined. I'm an architect and I'll read your wall of text.

Sure, I'd like to talk (all day) about architecture.
I might have to poke you at some time too regarding affordable software.

So much to discuss. We ought to create a separate thread dedicated solely to all aspects of architecture, where essays might be spammed.
-I’m not one to contaminate another’s thread with potentially epic and slightly off-topic ramblings about bio-energy systems, 3D scanners or anything.

Here's some pictures meanwhile...

Christopher Day.
This guy has devoted his life to green buildings and healing through design.
I can only dream of being a hermit living in my own energy efficient underground hobbit-hole. Constructed from recycled resources and sympathetic to its environment, this is close to my fantasy home.

[bimgx=450]http://www.beingsomewhere.net/images/window.jpg[/bimgx]​

Holy architecture
Temples and cathedrals are truly majestic works of art, often including deliberate and meticulous sacred geometry and ornate symbolism in their design.
They are major, labour intensive projects which often are often constructed from rarer and more difficult to obtain resources such as, say, marble and gold (gilded domes).
The deliberate richness in materials, aesthetics and use of space (which may include interior features like fancy arcades and arched vaulting), are meant to somehow bridge the gap between humankind and divinity.

Nandamanya Temple, Bagan, Myanmar

[bimgx=250]https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/15/05/60/1505606475e4458c6dc786e287833d56.jpg[/bimgx]
Notre Dame cathedral, Paris
[bimgx=350]https://media1.britannica.com/eb-media/85/83885-004-F4FFF1DC.jpg[/bimgx]

Chichen Itza, Yucatan, Mexico

[bimgx=350]https://img.rt.com/files/2016.11/original/582f30a2c3618846418b45ae.jpg[/bimgx]​

African huts
The shapes, design, and textures used in African tribal building styles interests me, as do the religions and mindsets behind such buildings.

Burkino Faso
[bimgx=250]https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/10/14/a1/1014a18622181a904ae8705ce297ce9c.jpg[/bimgx]

Ndebele tribe, South Africa
[bimgx=350]https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/21/e4/5f/21e45f49a6fe45fe629de1656c54dbc3.jpg[/bimgx]

Togo (Vodun is still dominant there)
[bimgx=350]https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/56/38/7d/56387dc8649e12453e98f16c66fd326c.jpg[/bimgx]​

One which deserves a mention:

Dragon temple, Bangkok
[bimgx=250]https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/2a/6d/ca/2a6dca2c17d87ff2d382a3aff18b4852.jpg[/bimgx]​

Far, far too many things to discuss. Not even scratched the surface.
Hope you like the pictures anyway. Thought they might be a little different than same old c.20th Western buildings/styles :)
 

TheManBeyond

Banned
Local time
Today 4:51 AM
Joined
Apr 19, 2014
Messages
2,850
-->
Location
Objects in the mirror might look closer than they
I like art, all kinds, as a general rule i enjoy more music than visuals. But there's so much to say that at the end there's nothing to say about it.
Visuals are more static and massive.
Audio is more personal and changing.
Look for streetart exarchia. There art moves people, and it serves as a social cohesive element. Not to talk about the use of the space in the neighbourhood.
Music doesn't play as much as visuals when giving identity to a place. Visual art is found in everything from ruins to dress code.
Anyway too sleepy to develop.
I enjoy doing both.

The question my friend, the thing I'm asking myself all the time is, am I good at it?
Who is an artist and who thinks he is an artist? How you determine it. Who is good and who is delusional. Please discard fame and money from your answers.
 

QuickTwist

Spiritual "Woo"
Local time
Yesterday 11:51 PM
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
7,182
-->
Location
...
The question my friend, the thing I'm asking myself all the time is, am I good at it?
Who is an artist and who thinks he is an artist? How you determine it. Who is good and who is delusional. Please discard fame and money from your answers.

Given the definition you gave, everyone is an artist to some degree. How one dresses themselves can be considered artistic expression.
 

Ex-User (14663)

Prolific Member
Local time
Today 4:51 AM
Joined
Jun 7, 2017
Messages
2,939
-->
I think of art as something that makes you experience certain ideas. For example If you want to depict greed, you don't just paint someone being greedy or try to explain what greed is, but make a painting that makes you feel and experience greed and make you conscious of it. In that sense it is a different medium, alongside philosophy and the rest, for exploring certain subjects.
 

Happy

sorry for english
Local time
Today 3:51 PM
Joined
Apr 26, 2013
Messages
1,336
-->
Location
Yes
So jelly of you ;)
The most fascinating part was the progression. The exhibition spaces were in chronological order, and it really gave you a sense of his evolution as an artist. He started out just experimenting with patterns and with each thing he sort of tried something new, refined it, then in the next work, tried something new again, having incorporated the last experiment as part of his style. It was quite surreal how seeing it in chronological order made his genius seem possible - almost within grasp. But then when you see a piece isolated, he seems like some sort of magician or wizard.
Sure, I'd like to talk (all day) about architecture.
I might have to poke you at some time too regarding affordable software.
That's easy - SketchUp. It's free to model (albeit sans a few useful tools). Then you need to pay when you want to produce orthographic vector drawings from your input. I wish I had a copy of SketchUp at work.

Next level up, there's Autodesk subscription products. I don't personally use any Autodesk products, but I used to. The key benefit is you can pay by the month, with the ability to purchase light editions of the major software packages, such as AutoCAD LT and Revit LT.

There are some free ones and open source ones, but I don't personally like them. They're generally very clunky.

Honestly, unless you intend to profit from their use, I wouldn't suggest paying much money for them.

If I were to buy any architecture software right now, it'd probably be a Rhino licence. But that would be mostly for developing my algorithmic design skills.
So much to discuss. We ought to create a separate thread dedicated solely to all aspects of architecture, where essays might be spammed.
-I’m not one to contaminate another’s thread with potentially epic and slightly off-topic ramblings about bio-energy systems, 3D scanners or anything.
I believe there are a few floating around. Kuu made one a while ago. We tend to get excited about it and then give up on it after about a day...
Here's some pictures meanwhile...

Christopher Day.
This guy has devoted his life to green buildings and healing through design.
I can only dream of being a hermit living in my own energy efficient underground hobbit-hole. Constructed from recycled resources and sympathetic to its environment, this is close to my fantasy home.

[bimgx=450]http://www.beingsomewhere.net/images/window.jpg[/bimgx]​
Wow. It's certainly interesting stuff (I've not heard of him before). I can't help but wonder how he manages waterproofing with a project like in that pic.
Holy architecture
Temples and cathedrals are truly majestic works of art, often including deliberate and meticulous sacred geometry and ornate symbolism in their design.
They are major, labour intensive projects which often are often constructed from rarer and more difficult to obtain resources such as, say, marble and gold (gilded domes).
The deliberate richness in materials, aesthetics and use of space (which may include interior features like fancy arcades and arched vaulting), are meant to somehow bridge the gap between humankind and divinity.


Nandamanya Temple, Bagan, Myanmar

[bimgx=250]https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/15/05/60/1505606475e4458c6dc786e287833d56.jpg[/bimgx]
Notre Dame cathedral, Paris
[bimgx=350]https://media1.britannica.com/eb-media/85/83885-004-F4FFF1DC.jpg[/bimgx]

Chichen Itza, Yucatan, Mexico

[bimgx=350]https://img.rt.com/files/2016.11/original/582f30a2c3618846418b45ae.jpg[/bimgx]​
I'll always have a soft spot for religious architecture. I'm lucky that I get to do a little bit of it here and there.

The gothic cathedral typology, to me, certainly epitomises the architectural pursuit. The marrying of the gothic arches, ribbed vaults and flying buttresses into a skeletal stone structure capable of enclosing not only large, but tall spaces, while allowing light to enter in abundance - all the while trying to reach ever closer to God... That is truly an incredible engineering feat.

Particularly the part I've highlighted in GREEN:
Funnily, if you look closely at the context these monuments were constructed in, you really see the corruption that lies at the core of the religious organisations. Particularly the Christian ones. While the people starved, the Church prospered.
African huts
The shapes, design, and textures used in African tribal building styles interests me, as do the religions and mindsets behind such buildings.

Burkino Faso
[bimgx=250]https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/10/14/a1/1014a18622181a904ae8705ce297ce9c.jpg[/bimgx]

Ndebele tribe, South Africa
[bimgx=350]https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/21/e4/5f/21e45f49a6fe45fe629de1656c54dbc3.jpg[/bimgx]

Togo (Vodun is still dominant there)
[bimgx=350]https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/56/38/7d/56387dc8649e12453e98f16c66fd326c.jpg[/bimgx]​

One which deserves a mention:

Dragon temple, Bangkok
[bimgx=250]https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/564x/2a/6d/ca/2a6dca2c17d87ff2d382a3aff18b4852.jpg[/bimgx]​
In all honesty, I know very little about African buildings. I must say, they do fascinate me.
Far, far too many things to discuss. Not even scratched the surface.
Hope you like the pictures anyway. Thought they might be a little different than same old c.20th Western buildings/styles :)
Actually, to me, the 20th century was the most interesting, architecturally - so much changed! Although the 19th century was pretty interesting too. While the profession has fallen off the horse in recent years (decades?), it will pick itself back up - or at least I think so. However, it'll probably be almost unrecognisable to its past.

BTW, I enjoyed your post. Talking about architecture is so much more interesting when it's not with other architects. I sort of despise them, actually. I recently went to an industry event and was absolutely dumbfounded at how a room full of people who supposedly make a life from thinking spatially, had not an ounce of respect for the personal space of each other. For the majority of them, all they really think about is themselves and how they want to be seen. They're all quite ludicrous, really.

:king-twitter:
 

TheManBeyond

Banned
Local time
Today 4:51 AM
Joined
Apr 19, 2014
Messages
2,850
-->
Location
Objects in the mirror might look closer than they
Given the definition you gave, everyone is an artist to some degree. How one dresses themselves can be considered artistic expression.

well i guess that's why i say the difference is made by someone who says: here you have this is my piece of art.
you cannot say only hand paintings are art. but maybe that's what you are all talking about in this thread when u refer to visual art.
 

Happy

sorry for english
Local time
Today 3:51 PM
Joined
Apr 26, 2013
Messages
1,336
-->
Location
Yes
There's a quote, attributed to Pablo Picasso, but probably never uttered by him:
Learn the rules like a pro, so you can break them like an artist

-Pablo Picasso...probably?
Anyway, in there is probably my own personal definition of art. For something to be 'art', it must be the expression of a mastered technique. Bonus points for breaking the rules.
 

Hadoblado

think again losers
Local time
Today 2:21 PM
Joined
Mar 17, 2011
Messages
6,614
-->
I think of art as indirect but intentional expression.

I think a lot of the time I don't have the patience to explore someone else's ideas, seeing them as a revisitation of stuff I'm already familiar with (for visual pieces). For music I again tend to miss the authors original intention, except I kinda make up my own and get all emotional about it anyway.
 

Cogitant

Fiducial Observer
Local time
Today 4:51 AM
Joined
Jun 8, 2017
Messages
157
-->
Location
Invading your reality
That's easy - SketchUp. It's free to model (albeit sans a few useful tools). Then you need to pay when you want to produce orthographic vector drawings from your input. I wish I had a copy of SketchUp at work.

Next level up, there's Autodesk subscription products. I don't personally use any Autodesk products, but I used to. The key benefit is you can pay by the month, with the ability to purchase light editions of the major software packages, such as AutoCAD LT and Revit LT.

Thanks for that.
I have been considering creating a portfolio.
My involvement with architecture goes back a long way as a matter of fact.
I studied it with the original intention of becoming an architect, but didn't complete RIBA 2 for various reasons.
Also, my last long-term relationship (over a year ago now) was with a workaholic xNTJ architect. So I guess the subject is of some significance to me.
I've looked into Autodesk before. My ex uses their software.
It would probably be my choice, since I am already familiar with it, only even the subscription cost is a bit much for me right now.

I'll always have a soft spot for religious architecture. I'm lucky that I get to do a little bit of it here and there.

You are lucky indeed. My ex's last project that I know of, for example, concerned designing a temperature regulation system for a stadium (his specific area of expertise is designing and implementing energy systems).

It's the deliberate use of symbol that I am intrigued by in religious and other (mostly historical) monumental architecture.
-Understanding and interpreting constants in nature and translating them into design.
-Understanding how the deliberate use of different shapes, symbols and patterns might create a particular atmosphere on a number of levels.
-Understanding how one can encode subliminal and subconscious messages into the environment.

Personally, I find the use of symbolism in design to be of significant value, not something to be overlooked.
I used to blog about subliminal and therapeutic architecture. The impact which structure might have on psychology.

Building design + materials likely influence the psychology of the occupant
[bimgx=350]https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/8e/bb/64/8ebb644a91494134a28cf526aecff4f1.jpg[/bimgx]

The gothic cathedral typology, to me, certainly epitomises the architectural pursuit. The marrying of the gothic arches, ribbed vaults and flying buttresses into a skeletal stone structure capable of enclosing not only large, but tall spaces, while allowing light to enter in abundance - all the while trying to reach ever closer to God... That is truly an incredible engineering feat.
Gothic architecture has always inspired me.
I live in the UK, and have visited many of the churches here simply because they are so beautiful, and the associated graveyards so peaceful (I enjoy reading gravestones).

It's fascinating how they developed from modest structures in the Norman/Early Medieval period to vast ornate buildings of the late Medieval period (£££).
In some places, architecture hints at older pre-Christian concepts and beliefs. Zoomorphic motifs and symbols such as the Green Man are to be found in many places.

Milan Cathedral (Interior)[bimgx=250]https://s-media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com/originals/ab/8f/2b/ab8f2bf490e26c7f18263cff7d6bd3fc.jpg[/bimgx]

'Pagan' Green man carved into a capital at the Church of St. Michel d'Entraygues, France [bimgx=350]http://www.greenmanenigma.com/photos/fr_angouleme.jpg[/bimgx]​

Funnily, if you look closely at the context these monuments were constructed in, you really see the corruption that lies at the core of the religious organisations. Particularly the Christian ones. While the people starved, the Church prospered.
The nature of society hasn't changed a huge amount, just power has (in the West at any rate) been transferred to more overt forms of capitalism.
Coming from a family with a RC background, it's been of interest to research the origins of the Church and the corruption/branching of it over those couple of millenia.
Personally, I'm a pantheist, and religion is not something that I subscribe to. However, I understand + respect the value of it to others.

Particularly from an historical perspective, it's doubtless that the clergy were corrupt.
The Church indeed did prey on the people
@ Martin Luther's criticisms of the Church and its abuse of power for the purposes of capital gain/use of indulgences:
Lastly, works of piety and charity are infinitely better than indulgences, and yet they do not preach these with such display or so much zeal; nay, they keep silence about them for the sake of preaching pardons. And yet it is the first and sole duty of all bishops, that the people should learn the Gospel and Christian charity: for Christ nowhere commands that indulgences should be preached. What a dreadful thing it is then, what peril to a bishop, if, while the Gospel is passed over in silence, he permits nothing but the noisy outcry of indulgences to be spread among his people, and bestows more care on these than on the Gospel!
-Martin Luther, introductory letter to the 95 theses, 1517
Western idealized interpretation of the 'Everlasting Lord' with his 'flock'
[bimgx=350]https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-mXrLOckNqrI/VyGqI_eJYaI/AAAAAAAALuY/TJghLz4L3QAdBHCsp-8EvWRJTo1h9icggCLcB/s1600/Jesus%252C%2BYour%2BGood%2BShepherd%2BAnd%2BDoor%2Bby%2BJoseph%2BPrince.PNG[/bimgx]​
But since people tend toward flocking, a smaller proportion tend toward control, and people are keen to accept the possibility of life after death (to numb the fear of non-existence), I suppose that religion and its associated ostentatious architecture was a somewhat inevitable outcome.
-Thank science for secularism.

In all honesty, I know very little about African buildings. I must say, they do fascinate me.

You might enjoy browsing this website concerning African vernacular architecture:
http://www.africanvernaculararchitecture.com/

-I'm avidly interested in symbolism, metaphor, semiotics and the occult.
Tribal architecture speaks to me, at least, of a way of living and the connection with the dream-time (insert Jungian reference) which the modern West has forgotten.

Regarding older ways of thinking, or perhaps, more specifically, 'magical thinking', some of the features of global and historical buildings are built to a specific design in line with spiritual/religious ideas and superstitions. For example, a roof might be curved to ward off ghosts (China).

Dogon spirit Shrine, Mali [bimgx=350]https://sacredsites.com/images/africa/mali/binu-shrine-01-500.jpg[/bimgx]

A more modern and local-to-me example of superstition-inspired architecture are the c.19th round houses found in the village of Veryan on the Roseland Peninsula:

They are apparently round so that demons/the devil can't hide in any corners

[bimgx=350]https://www.visitcornwall.com/sites/default/files/product_image/P1030600.JPG[/bimgx]

Actually, to me, the 20th century was the most interesting, architecturally - so much changed! Although the 19th century was pretty interesting too. While the profession has fallen off the horse in recent years (decades?), it will pick itself back up - or at least I think so. However, it'll probably be almost unrecognisable to its past.

Population/technological explosion led to a lot of exciting movements during the 19th and 20th centuries. I enjoy neo-gothic style and Art Nouveau in particular. Not especially keen on the Bauhaus aesthetic however, but understand the socio-political environment which sired it.
Personally, I prefer organic styles over industrial styles, and prefer to see cleverly used angles, lines and curves.

Antoni Gaudí, Casa Batlló [bimgx=250]http://media.architecturaldigest.com/photos/57ae38a721fff4dc072ead48/master/w_640,c_limit/art-nouveau-buildings-001.jpg[/bimgx]
The roots of 'modern' architecture lie in the renaissance, when influential minds rediscovered ancient Greco-Roman ideas and ideals, and presented them in a contemporaneous format.
Inigo Jones is a famous name from the latter part of the period. His Palladian designs employed Vitruvian laws and principles, and it is disputed that he is the father of modern architecture.

Inigo Jones, Queen's House at Greenwich
[bimgx=350]http://britainunlimited.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/jonesqueenshouse.jpg[/bimgx]
BTW, I enjoyed your post. Talking about architecture is so much more interesting when it's not with other architects.
Thanks :)
I guess even the greatest of ideas can have the life squished out of them beneath the weight of legal considerations, nitpicking, and satisfying the 9786754 demands/expectations of others. Well that's my 'INTP' perspective, at least ('J' types seem not to be too bothered by what I'd consider boring).

My ex was pretty obsessed with his work and the people involved with it (clients, colleagues, connected social events, impressing his boss).
So obsessed, to the exclusion of all else, that it led to him becoming my ex, which is a pity because I really like the guy.

But yes, I am very interested in all aspects of the subject, pretty much everything from cave-dwelling to the cutting edge and beyond.

Biomimicry and design -http://homeklondike.site/2017/02/28/biomimicry-design-lotus-building-super-trees-of-singapore/
[bimgx=350]http://homeklondike.site/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/7-Gardens-by-the-bay-park-singapore-biomimicry-in-modern-architecture-futuristic-hi-tech-trees.jpg[/bimgx]​

-I'll write something about underground building at some point soon. The idea has been attractive to me since childhood.

Underground home, Coober Pedy, Australia[bimgx=350]https://media-cdn.tripadvisor.com/media/photo-s/01/3f/89/93/faye-s-underground-home.jpg[/bimgx]​
 

QuickTwist

Spiritual "Woo"
Local time
Yesterday 11:51 PM
Joined
Jan 24, 2013
Messages
7,182
-->
Location
...
well i guess that's why i say the difference is made by someone who says: here you have this is my piece of art.
you cannot say only hand paintings are art. but maybe that's what you are all talking about in this thread when u refer to visual art.

Mmm... I wasn't talking explicitly about visual art.
 

gilliatt

Active Member
Local time
Yesterday 11:51 PM
Joined
Feb 8, 2011
Messages
425
-->
Location
usa
Art: The reason man needs art is that man's cognitive faculty is conceptual, man acquires knowledge, it guides his actions, not by single isolated percepts, but by means of abstractions. It is not material, it is man's consciousness, his soul that needs it. That is important. Art is a selective re-creation of reality according to an artist's metaphysical value judgments. Art isolates and integrates reality which represent man's fundamental view of himself and existence. Art, it is a medium of communication for the moral ideal.
 

Cognisant

Prolific Member
Local time
Yesterday 5:51 PM
Joined
Dec 12, 2009
Messages
10,564
-->
@lightfire Amazing.

What is art?
Fundamentally I think art is that which pleases us, which is not to say that's all that art can be, that which makes art pleasing to one may make it abhorrent to another but so long as it appeals to someone then at least from that person's perspective it is art.

I appreciate art as a form of expression, whether it be an expression of a thought or an emotion that it is an expression of something makes it meaningful, whereas I detest art that exists for its own sake. Abstract modern art may supposedly represent something but to me it evokes nothing, I'm not going to sit in an art gallery trying to read the meaning in some squiggles on a white canvas, the onus is on the artist to express themselves to me and if they fail at that then in my opinion they fail as an artist.
 

toki

ıʞoʇ
Local time
Today 12:51 AM
Joined
Jan 15, 2016
Messages
9
-->
art and music are universal languages, where you can read and write in a language and fully comprehend/never understand the meaning & intent

you can appreciate the visual/auditory beat and cadence and enjoy it freely of any culture or assumptions or disabilities

i could write out plenty more boring generalizations but that's it for now
 

Polaris

Prolific Member
Local time
Yesterday 5:51 PM
Joined
Oct 13, 2009
Messages
2,261
-->
I like Quint Buchholz. His paintings remind me of my dreams:

4117


4118


4119


4120
 

The Grey Man

τὸ φῶς ἐν τῇ σκοτίᾳ φαίνει
Local time
Yesterday 11:51 PM
Joined
Oct 6, 2014
Messages
859
-->
Location
Canada
My sister tells me that I have opinions regarding art that would be more fitting in the 19th century, and I suppose this is true. I view the history of Western art since the industrial revolution as the history of a lamentable lapse in tradition that is paralleled in our society by its abandonment of all notions of dignity and propriety (not to say morality, which persists in a debased form as a tool of doctrinaire politicians) and in our philosophical literature by its degeneration into impotent scholasticism. When I look at modern objets d'art, it is decay that I see, and when I listen to modern music, I hear only the senile prattling of an aging culture that refuses to acknowledge the decline of its mental powers. The usual apology for modern art, that the merit of any work of art is a matter of taste and not a quality of it in itself, does not satisfy, but infuriates me with its indiscriminateness, which aims to paralyze all judgment, and thereby all thought, regarding art in order to legitimize whatever flatulent claptrap is "current" and discredit the eternal achievements of our forebears. I believe that there is a difference between great art and art that is mediocre or mean, and that, while it may be difficult to identify precisely what that difference is, it need not therefore be disregarded.
 

Ex-User (14663)

Prolific Member
Local time
Today 4:51 AM
Joined
Jun 7, 2017
Messages
2,939
-->


anyways.. I used to think that the only worthy art was realistic painting etc. Now I think art is a completely subjective thing.
 

ZenRaiden

One atom of me
Local time
Today 4:51 AM
Joined
Jul 27, 2013
Messages
4,406
-->
Location
Between concrete walls
Actually I think real fun part about art is creating it too. I think people who never tried creating art dont know it can be fun. Its actually used as therapy and I probably know why. It allows a form of self expression an a way to vent feelings and also kind of tap into the subconscious in ways we wouldnt consider really possible.

As for art in general I think a nice picture on a wall can be pretty uplifting even if we dont look at it that much. There are other things like music and although for me music can be distracting sometimes it allows to tap in to certain moods or thoughts that I dont mind.
Apart from entertainment value and general psychohygiene it can also be a way of challenging our common way of thinking. Plus art can be included in education in which case its a big plus. I mean arent pictures of T Rex in encyclopedias art? Of course they are and many other things.
 

birdsnestfern

Earthling
Local time
Today 12:51 AM
Joined
Oct 7, 2021
Messages
1,670
-->
Its been a long time, since 2001, but I took an Art History class and really got a lot from it. I've also taken those classes online about perspective and drawing which were somewhat good, but not enough to push me forward on it. As a teen I liked pencil drawing, and in art class I did some chalk drawings of nudes. I have drawn some really good 'estate' home designs in pencil, and enjoyed designing the perfect kitchen layout, underground homes, always loved architectural drawing and design. I have really enjoyed art museum visits (I've been to Chicago Art museum, Smithsonian Art museum, Seattle Art Museum, De Young Museum in SF, The Cummer Museum and others such as smaller ones in Las Vegas, DC, etc). Every time I come out of one, my brain gets super charged with creativity and I can do those beta wave brain states creating all sorts of things. Yes, art can be very emotional for me, even just to see it it triggers so much in me. What I especially like is if there is a lucid dream with gorgeous content, the attempt of trying to draw those inner visions can be healing and magic. Its just that my visualized art can not be drawn, because the mediums change, imagine blown glass strands lit up from within, stretching into interesting twists, lit up like LED lights in 3D space, or imagine entire cities made of wooden totems stretching into the sky in various twisting branch supports and swirls, or colors and shapes that are super beautiful together, maybe neon colors in Haitian art doing vibrating things that change, like neon purple, green, yellow, black, yellow and pinks.

Anyway, my brain creates visuals that are somewhat amazing, but that I as a human feel unable to duplicate because there is no technology that will do what I see. How can you paint or draw colors that are moving light colors that are liquid like that are lit up from within and keep changing and growing? Possibly with stop motion individual movie cameras, but I don't know.
 

birdsnestfern

Earthling
Local time
Today 12:51 AM
Joined
Oct 7, 2021
Messages
1,670
-->
 

birdsnestfern

Earthling
Local time
Today 12:51 AM
Joined
Oct 7, 2021
Messages
1,670
-->
Copied and Pasted from another page, I did not write this, but found it interesting to learn about the lifted skirt.

The ‘Ana-Suromai,’ derived from the Greek word meaning ‘to lift the skirt’ is known to be one of the most powerful gestures to scare away the devil or stop an army in it's tracks. This painting is an outcry, a visual denouncement of the corrupt system that has brought our world to a state of chaos, based on greed, war profiteering, and the mindless consumption by the masses. It symbolizes the awakening of our personal power, shocking one into introspection as this system is in the process of crumbling.

They censored the raw exposure of the vagina with a smiley face ... the confrontation with the genitals is meant to shock one out of unconsciousness and into re-membering that we all come from the mother.

I lift my skirt to oppression and dishonesty, to lies and deceit.
On the left is war and on the right is slavery... slavery to ideals, to identities, to nations and manipulative systems.
The teddy bear leaning up against the chair symbolizes our lost innocence... The table of 13 individuals symbolizes the tip of the hierarchy of the current system sitting around a map of the civilized world... the faces undefined. Remnants of our consumer culture strewn around them.

The egg symbolizes a new perspective, new energy... and where ever it touches the earth new life is sprouting, and where it is connecting with the people around the table, it is connecting with them... in an individual way... in silence.
Metro's cube which is one of the most sacred symbols of sacred geometry is located over the heart offering a clear channel. The scarab, symbolizing re-birth rests at the throat... the full moon rises behind my head as the natural law of the celestial patterns are interwoven with life. The rainbow winged serpents appear as protectors and creators, weaving resounding support for this outcry, this call for justice.

Sometimes it takes great controversy to rattle the comfort levels... It's time to wake up folks and identify what you truly want. Get real with it. Not time to follow the insanity, but to go inside and find your truth.
Write it out, paint it out, talk it out, sing it out... And define the Good. What is it that you truly want to see happen in the world. Let's focus on that. Become the change you want to see.
#liftingoftheskirt #revolution #wakeup

'Ana Suromai'
53x79" oil and casein on canvas - 2005-11
painting by Amanda Sage
See less
 

Attachments

  • lift skirt.jpg
    lift skirt.jpg
    172.2 KB · Views: 29

birdsnestfern

Earthling
Local time
Today 12:51 AM
Joined
Oct 7, 2021
Messages
1,670
-->
Beautiful cookie art.

Here is an artist that takes old keyboard keys and turns them into mosaic paintings:

 
Top Bottom