- Here are some of the things I learned that I never bothered to think about before:
• For a long, long time artists had to be responsible for making their own materials. You couldn’t go out and buy paint in a store. Canvas wasn’t cheap and ubiquitous.
• The math of perspective was an unbelievable achievement. People looked at it like we do “3-D” today. We just assume anyone can do it.
• Almost all art, until really recently, had to have a purpose. You didn’t buy it for your bathroom. Almost all of it, for a long time, was religiously focused and put in temples or churches. Straying from that was a revolution (almost literally).
• Museums are a recent development. Before that, you had to go to temples or churches to see it.
• For that matter, owning a piece of mass produced art didn’t happen until really recently as well. You couldn’t mass produce sculptures.
• Getting the human body right took so, so, so much time and learning. Again – we take that for granted.
#learnnewthings schedule:
January 2016 – Water and growth in California
February – Wine
March – Game theory
April – Cryptography
May – Art history
June – The history of railroads in the U.S.
July – Oceanography
August – Football (strategy and theory)
September – Chaos theory
November – Linguistics
-all western art before about 1400 kinda sucked, then we learned how to draw people -all western art after about 1915 absolutely sucks, since we forgot how to draw people (and everything else) -everything in between those years is so impressive it's almost baffling -best way to learn about art history is first to read a giant art history textbook and look at the pictures and learn words like baroque etc. take advantage of this; it's rarely true. -also the best way is to go to museums but that's kinda pricey -private collectors(/popes) who happened to really enjoy a given artist a) shaped our perceptions of who could paint and who couldn't more than anything else and b) saved a ton of art which is now priceless and would otherwise be forgotten or never have gotten famous -- like you say, canvas weren't cheap. artists painted over their old art. space wasn't cheap either, so they threw stuff away.
-all western art before about 1400 kinda sucked, then we learned how to draw people
-all western art after about 1915 absolutely sucks, since we forgot how to draw people (and everything else)
-everything in between those years is so impressive it's almost baffling
Best possible reply. A well earned badge. I mean, how can you discount the fact that Andrew Wyeth existed:
I did the whole headphone tour thing at the National Gallery and learned a good deal. I recommend it.-also the best way is to go to museums but that's kinda pricey
yeah, but wasoxygen lives in DC amongst the greatest art museums in the world that just happen to have free admission.
That's a bit of a culture shock to me that it seems like an exceptional thing that museum has free admission. Is it like that in USA as a whole? I don't know if that's a law or just a custom here, but all museums (aside of very short expositions or severely underfunded in my experience) provide access for free at least one day per week. I don't know if that comes from noble "anyone, no matter what is their financial state, deserves free access to knowledge and culture" or some weird law that allows, for example, lucrative tax break… but it's there. Warsaw also has "Night of the Museums" twice a year where all of them are open whole night and anyone can visit for free. It's a surprisingly huge event to be honest.
James Smithson left a substantial estate to his nephew, but when the nephew died without heirs Smithson's will stipulated that the funds be sent "to the United States of America, to found at Washington, under the name of the Smithsonian Institution, an Establishment for the increase & diffusion of knowledge among men." On August 29, 1838, eleven boxes of gold sovereigns arrived in New York, eventually funding the creation of today's collection of museums, which now receive about 60% of their budget from national taxes. It wasn't until I started traveling that I realized it was normal for museums to charge for admission. There are many private galleries in D.C. as well, but it can be hard to compete for visitors.
In the US, our taxes support these museums, as I'm sure they do in Poland. However, many of the museums across United States are for-profit entities. It's a big difference in many regards between much of the rest the world and the United States. Capitalism rules the day here. Much of these entities receive funding from private citizens too, endowments etc. People are "patrons" of the arts. Rich people supporting museums which will have some days that are open to all but charge admission normally. However, Washington DC is deliberately the peoples city. There's much for everyone To do there, even the poor. Though it's extremely expensive to live or rent there.
Both wasoxygen and flagamuffin made similar points, and after doing some reading on my own I must say that Polish museums do indeed get both private investors and governmental funding to some extent. I mean, most stuff outside of Louvre is unlikely to get by on tickets alone, and even that is my ignorant gut-feeling. Something just felt alien when I heard that I don't get a choice to go with a crowd for free or pay 4-8 USD (converted for you guys, depends on the museum) to get in. You can halve it if you are a student in all cases. I guess that all countries have their quirks, some are just less expected than others.
My wife, ecib, and I were recently discussing how only by working to learn a craft, can you begin to really appreciate it, and the masters of it. Consumer-critics waste a lot of our energy, because they are not aware of their ignorance. Often, to even perceive a quality, you have to find it lacking in your own effort.
Much in agreement; after spending hours to reach a point where I can muddle through some simple thing with only a few missed notes, hearing Devac play Chopin is awe-inspiring.
I have recently recalled this post, and I feel a bit justified with making a separate response over editing the old ond. Just to be on the safe side, please don't take me as a show-off. This is what I think that I wanted to say, but lacked a point of purchase to base my explanation better. Today I was pondering what use for my practice and looked-up my list. Bach, Prelude and Fugue… "well, poop" was my firth thought as it's hardly my favourite composer or number. But being a man of rigour who works on trying to reduce his amount of bitching and moaning I went along. Here is how it went. While I don't feel like it's bad, I can spot more and more problems each time I'm listening to it back. Uneven tempo, too short or long pause, my skill with enforcing dynamics sucks as always etc. But without listening to it as played by a professional, I was unable to see most of the problems. When it comes to Chopin… it just flows. Memorising notes is not even a problem, it simply happens. I don't need to hear someone play it, because something in the back of my head can spot every single thing that goes astray (by the way, English question: would a word 'heteroclite' even fit here? If so, how? I don't want to start using it like a pretentious prick, but my vocabulary surely could us a boost), it's almost a burning shame that I'm doing a disservice to the masterpiece. Every bit of dynamic, tempo change or slightest inflection scream at me and I can easily realise each technical mistake. To a point where I feel that if Chopin was to rise from his grave the first thing he would do, would be finding me to deliver a solid bitch-slap. I don't know why or how, but for a few composers I seem to 'get' to be on their wavelength. Bach, despite being amazing in and of himself and very ambitious and challenging to play, just isn't like that for me. When I see Chopin's or Vivaldi's notes I can hear whole symphony in my head. With Bach, I'm like a child who needs to resort to muttering something like "pa-pa-Pa-pam, pa-pa-Pa-pam, na-pa-pa-pa-Pa-pam-paM-na-PaM" in an effort to make out how that's supposed to sound in the first place. That said, kantos - I owe you an apology regarding my remark from about a month ago regarding 'feeling the music' and 'portrayal of musicians' I made in this post last month. I think I now get what you wanted to tell me, but didn't realise what you actually meant something similar at the time. Sorry about miscommunication on my part.
So that's why I had such a spike in playbacks! Thanks for promotion and a good word :D. By the way, your 'some simple thing' was my childhood nightmare to play. It might seem straightforward as far as notes go, but Bach just does not compute in my brain. Chopin flows and seem almost intuitive in that "how else should it go if not as written" way. I don't feel it like that with Bach and many other composers. Don't sell yourself short :).
Cubism is the one that always bugged me. But then a Cubist exhibit came to the Seattle Art Museum, so I went and looked at it. And it took you baby-steps through the process. The light clicked on for me at "Soldiers Playing Cards" by Fernand Legere. This is when I was finally able to deconstruct the image, see the scene, and see what the artist did to the scene. It blew my mind. The most fascinating painting in that exhibition to me was one I can't find any more... I believe it was Mondrian, but I am not sure now. It was round, about 4-feet in diameter, and was a white field with short black lines all over it... none of them touching... all either vertical or horizontal. He worked on that painting for 25 years. He was clearly searching for something in that image... you can see hundreds of little corrections and adjustments all over the canvas... there was a balance, or .... something that he was trying to achieve with it, and I found it riveting. If anyone has a photo of that painting, I'd love to see it...
Curious, is this your blog? Or are you just following it? I really like the concept. One of those things I'd really like to do but feel would fall by the wayside like a new year's resolution. Maybe not though.
It's not mine, but it has been the source of some great conversations. I agree, it is a great idea. I can't keep up with his schedule, but I read one of the books on game theory and did some studying on cryptography. I've also added some recommended books to my wish list. I skipped this month, but hope to read a book about the railroad in June.