| Original message (2633 Views )
|
Replies: |
| Juke Joint Jezebel 3609th Post
 
Platinum Carpet V.I.P- Board Master
    
    
    
     
     
|  "Re(7):Amano book question" , posted Wed 21 Nov 22:52:
quote:
OK, I know Americans tend to use the word "artist" with a much looser meaning than we tend to. I think it means "person who kinda creates pretty things that are cool to watch/listen/read, like, you know, deep stuff, man", or something.
I'm fine with this meaning. But please don't add History and the french meaning of "artist" to this. At this rate, Clamp will soon be considered the new Da Vinci, Uematsu the new Beethoven and Anno the new Spinoza.
you Frenchmen make me sick
quote:
Didja mean a hardcover copy? Both the Japanese and English versions of this book are paperback from what I've seen in bookstores.
i just came back from my studio, where i left the book. didn't realize that it was a paperback! unnecessary question brings up angry discussion!
also, haven't read the Sandman book, but i'll probably get ahold of it sooner or later. my sister kept up with Sandman way back in the day, so it blew my mind years later when i realized that Amano did some art for it. i think it's just cool when worlds connect like that. hopefully, Dream Hunters is in her collection somewhere
AND A FINAL NOTE! ack, it's all subjective. you guys can argue all day about how great or how terrible this or that artist is. you can base your opinion on the artist's technique, skill, or the way they compose images. or you can base it on their choices of color, lighting, or whatever the hell else there is. your opinion has no more value than the next guy's
speaking of worthless opinions, the reason why i like Amano is partly nostalgia. the rest of it's because i genuinely love his style. it's unique, decorative, and (for the most part) figure-based. i think the uniqueness of his style comes from not having any formal art education. at least, i don't think he's had any
EDIT:
quote:
Behind the scenes look at Rumble Roses artist WHO HAS NO ARMS! Very inspiring:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=ZEPdu04V57I&feature=related
AAAHHHH you're telling me! i've had discussions with people about how sad it'd be to lose our main hands. i just told them that i'd teach myself to draw and paint with my left hand (i'm right-handed). then of course the discussion would lead to losing my left hand. i'd tell them that i'd teach myself to do things with my feet, and if i lost my feet i'd use my mouth. it's so beautiful to see someone actually do this!
[this message was edited by Juke Joint Jezebel on Wed 21 Nov 23:03] |
| nobinobita
213th Post
Frequent Customer
|  "Re(8):Amano book question" , posted Thu 22 Nov 01:18
quote:
speaking of worthless opinions, the reason why i like Amano is partly nostalgia. the rest of it's because i genuinely love his style.
I think the reason you feel nostalgia in the first place is because you've always genuinely loved his style.
People often trivialize nostalgia, but I really believe the tastes people have as children are often more genuine than their opinions as adults.
As a kid you didn't get cool points for knowing who Amano is, there was no social pressure to like him. You didn't even know who he was, you juts knew that those pictures were awesome. Now you have people all over the net ACHING to tell you that they're "soooo over him" and have moved on to better things, whatever the hell those may be.
This is a trend that I see alot in the western world (and no i'm not originally from this hemisphere). People feel pressured to tear down something old, and often precious, to bolster up the new ("old" and "new" being relative to the "people" in question).
And as far as the whole "what is art" debate goes, all I can say is that when I see a beautiful picture (this does not just mean "pretty"), regardless of where it came from, it stirs my soul in such a physical and spiritual way that if it's not art then surely it's something as great.
|
| nobinobita
214th Post
Frequent Customer
| "Re(10):Amano book question" , posted Thu 22 Nov 04:36
Hmmmm good points.
I think i sound too negative and maybe accusatory on my last post. I really want to know what people think about art and why they like it.
I'd like to elaborate on my fluid definition of art. I wont give you an exact definition cos then we'd get into semantics cos it'd be so broad and inclussive.
But basically, I feel the term "art" as an exclusive term is somewhat out of date. When you talk about the visuals in a painting, a movie, a comic book, or a videogame, you naturally call it art. Yet only some of those mediums are acceptable as art proper in some circles. And yet those unacceptable mediums like comics, animation, and most recently videogames make people feel things within the same breadth as what people traditionally feel from "high" art.
The reason I feel this way about art, about not having a clear seperation between low and high is very much tied to the way i was raised.
I am Chinese, i grew up on Chinese art and stories, Japanese comics and cartoons, and some American comics and shows (French too if you count Tintin, Smufs, Inspector Gadget and Asterix). The "high" traditonal art that i saw in books and temples and museums depicted cool stuff like warriors battling demons, dragons flying through the sky and rich colorful fantastic landscapes. Hearing my grandfather recount the stories of the 108 outlaws of the marsh was not a far cry from watching Dragon Ball and Samurai Troopers on TV. Both were appealing in the same way. I had some sense that paintings and sculptures in museums were more expensive and old and important than regular stuff lying around, but I never thought that made them intrinsically better.
That's not to say that I thought all art was equal. When I came to the united States I was appalled by how terrible some of the cartoons looked. I intrinsically knew that Looney Tunes looked a helluvalot better than Scooby Do Kids. I knew that Art Thiebert drew much more appealingly than Jim Valentino. I knew that the first 4 episodes of Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (and the show's opening) somehow just looked better than every single episode that came afterwards.
I am rambling, but does anyone get my point? Art is something I feel in my gut. I feel it if I like it or not and I don't care where it comes from. I believe I think this way because of the family I grew up in which was in turn informed by Chinese values, which have traditionally less of a distinction between high art and folk art. If we see anything as "high" its probably calligraphy, which is historically more venerated than painting or sculpture.
Anyway, this is how I think, but obviously it's not how everyone functions.
So if you think differently, please elaborate.
Iggy, I'd especially like to know how and why you draw a distinction between "art" and "other". I'm not saying that my way is better, I just honestly want to know what drives someone to think in such a way. I am guessing it has to do with the cultures we come from, but I could be wrong. So if you have time, please share your thoughts and I will listen and I promise not to be snarky or judgemental.
please excuse my ramblings. I generally only post on this board to keep myself awake while i work 24 hour plus workdays from home.
Cheers.
|
| Iggy 8253th Post
Platinum Carpet V.I.P- Board Master
| "Re(2):Re(10):Amano book question" , posted Thu 22 Nov 07:29
Ishmael : we could call him a dessinateur, peintre, illustrateur or maybe other words I can't remember right now, depending on its medium. (a painter, an illustrator ? a drawer ???). Either way, it is totally possible to be one or several of these terms without being (or even claiming to be) an artist.
quote:
Iggy, I'd especially like to know how and why you draw a distinction between "art" and "other".
Actually, I think French (and maybe German as well?) have a very, very complicated way to think “art” because of centuries of hardcore western philosophy.
There are so many philosophers on esthetics and art (my favorites being Theodor Adorno and Hannah Arendt, the most gruesome of all) that of course nobody can begin a sentence with "art is..." and have everybody agree with him.
For example, you could consider art as a totally social creation, something that help people using it to gain a higher form of conscience, about the world or about them. But you can also consider it as an act of pure egoism, the autistic expression by the artist of something that couldn't be expressed in any other way, an artist for whom the creation in itself is the goal, and who wouldn't care of being understood or even read/seen/whatever, and/or whose creation can't even be fully understood by anyone beside himself in extreme cases.
Either way, I think art forms are by essence exacting. It is something whose simple usage can't be profitable; it has to be read/listened to/ watched dozens of time to unfold and react. It's an act both demanding in time, energy and concentration.
Then you could answer that the repetition of even the most simple tasks owns in itself the path to transcendence, that the action in itself in non important, and I couldn’t guard cancel.
So, yeah. Philosophy is kinda complicated, and I'm not sure I could explain myself better even in my native language, primarily because I'm a moron.
What I also wanted to say is: we tend to believe words simply describe the world as it is, in a neutral way. Unfortunately, it is a grave error. Westerners, and their western language as well, tend to think they are the world, and the world is what they think. In other way, what they see outside of Europe is basically something they already knew, except less good, because, hey, it isn't European!
Let’s take the example of the problem of the Void (I think that’s what you say in English… The nothingness maybe?). Buddhism conceptualized it and thought about it thousands of years ago. Not westerners. When they discovered Buddhism, two things happened: people like Schopenhauer adapted the problems to their way of thinking, and labeled it “philosophy”. The original questioning couldn’t be “philosophy”: it was Asian! And we know Asians can’t think! So it must be “religion”.
The same thing happens with Confucianism for example: you won’t find a lot of western scolars considering it a “philosophy” on par with classical Greek philosophy. Because… Greek people created philosophy, and Chinese people aren’t the only ones to consider they are the center of the world.
I can think of two words for which this is particularly important: art and religion. None of them can have a proper universal definition. Religion is a word that we (western people) tend to think unconsciously as a repetition, with moderate degrees of deformation, of the “religion” we know best and/or were raised into. Unfortunately, it is loaded with meaning that can only describe Christianity (and, to a lesser extend, Islam). The use of the word “religion” to describe the roman gods, animisms, Judaism or basically anything else is misleading, and prevents us from understanding their complexity and their uniqueness. Translating a foreign word into “religion” because it’s kinda the same thing is the worst error of all, because the two cultures won’t be able to understand each other on that subject.
The same thing happens with “art”: we forget “art” (what you would call “higher art” and what would be my French definition of “art”) is a concept created by westerners to describe a particular field of their culture.
For example, I remember a particular ridiculous lesson, given by a teacher specialized in poetry, and trying to study the use of metaphors (in the strict poetry meaning) in some famous XIIth century Japanese poet’s work. It was a complete disaster, because metaphors are a form western poets created to suit their particular needs of metrics and language (and they certainly didn’t used it during the XIIth century). It was a meaningless and western-centered way of loosing a lot of reputation for nothing. Of course, there was not a trace of metaphor in the Japanese poet’s works because he didn’t need them. He had other problems, and he used other forms to solve them, forms that are not present in western poetry and would barely be considered art from our western point of view.
So, I strongly think we shouldn’t use the word “art” to qualify anything not created in an area and era using this world, because it is misleading. Nô theatre doesn’t comply with any definition of “art”. That doesn’t prevent it from being one of the most complex and fascinating creations of mankind.
I don’t know if that rant make sense, but basically, what I meant is :
1) words are difficult.
2) I hate Amano and he should yiff in hell with his furfag friends.
Thank you for your attention.
|
| sfried
67th Post
Occasional Customer
| "Re(9):Amano book question" , posted Thu 22 Nov 10:10:
quote:
This is a trend that I see alot in the western world (and no i'm not originally from this hemisphere). People feel pressured to tear down something old, and often precious, to bolster up the new ("old" and "new" being relative to the "people" in question).
I'm not from that hemisphere, either. But I don't think you should generalize everything into the category of "western" (even European and American have very distinct differences in culture/perception towards what is "nostalgic").
quote:
I am Chinese, i grew up on Chinese art and stories, Japanese comics and cartoons, and some American comics and shows (French too if you count Tintin, Smufs, Inspector Gadget and Asterix).
Hey, I grew up on those, too. Although I'm not Chinese, but neither am I a westerner.
[this message was edited by sfried on Thu 22 Nov 10:11] |
| Juke Joint Jezebel 3610th Post
Platinum Carpet V.I.P- Board Master
| "Re(3):Re(10):Amano book question" , posted Thu 22 Nov 10:14
quote:
iggy, iggy, iggy
oh, i love it! i truly do! right when i expected a big ball of French anger, i get a detailed point of view from a France native. a philosopher, to boot!
i suppose the word "art" has come from such a rich history that it's hard for you and others of that kind of background to conceive it the way that contemporary artists and art lovers view it. i can see where you're coming from now. there's no bigger hater of modern art than yours truly. jesus, there's so much fucking bullshit out there today. crappy installations are in, baby, and older mediums like painting is slowly dying off. they'll never die completely, but man is it sad to see it fade away
i've gone off on a strangely different tangent. anyways, i think there is a sentence that begins with "art is..." that everyone can agree with: art is communication. lovers of the classics and lovers of contemporary cannot deny that. when an artist creates anything (not just a visual artist, even musicians and others), they're trying to communicate something out to other people -- a story, a feeling, an idea, something. when it comes down to it, people make art to communicate something
quote:
And as far as the whole "what is art" debate goes, all I can say is that when I see a beautiful picture (this does not just mean "pretty"), regardless of where it came from, it stirs my soul in such a physical and spiritual way that if it's not art then surely it's something as great.
so beautiful, so poetic. i'm going to have to steal that. also, i've never considered nostalgia in that way. it makes me rethink a lot of things
quote:
...all thanks to JJJ's hardcover hallucinations
whut, rofl
|
| Toxico 4314th Post
Platinum Carpet V.I.P- Board Master
|  "Re(7):Amano book question" , posted Fri 23 Nov 01:20
quote:
Also, Nomura, though not as cool as Amano gets way too much flack. He's a decent artist who's always getting better and he's good at making memorable designs and distinct faces.
You mean, the same face, over and over and over ....
That's exactly what I thought.
Even though it might sound redundant after what has been written here; I will add a reply as I fell that some part of the topic was set into motion due to my previous answer.
Even though I have lacked formal "art education" since I was something like 16, I do agree with the statement that art is communication; as from long ago I have seen art as a 'give, take and polish' affair. While trying to create art, you not only try to express or say something that you think or try to send a message that's within you; you are also taking into account a current background, you are either following some existing rules, or you are trying to go against them; and while creating art, you can have many sources of inspiration that are shown or taken by you through your life, carreer or what ever; that is, every time someone's work touch you, adds with you and/or changes you, so; within my point of view, art is like trying to make a point; in a way less direct, way more complicated and way more beatiful way other than simplily saying it, and while making that point, you explain it in your peculiar manner of view.
One thing that I always have been in conflict with is, is when "random crazyness" gets in the way of art; usually, art gets itself weakened or totally lose it's point if the author itself does things in a completely random manner; many 'wanna be bloody two shoes fake' artists think in a manner of "I didn't knew what I was doing, and when I tried to head into a direction, I made a mistake and something marvelous ended up being created". That's not art, and if that is good art; then the author is not the person in question, that's just a stupidly huge cosmic coincidence; and if that "good random art" is frecuent, then the author itself is nothing more than a joke, as he truly can't keep up with a good level unless it is by chance, and he can't truly understand 'a good level' as he can grasp it; but usually, that random produced art has good points, what I usually "do" when encountering this is, that I take the good thinks/things in into my experiences, and purge the bad things out and brand them as irrelevant. One part of my view of art; is that art is something that someone made either by following rules, or while trying to overcome rules; and while I like that definition, that view for art has limitations and negative connotations that make this far from perfect, wich is in part, a reason to keep myself learning and keep myself into contact with things that I like, trying to see and grasp what the authors did and tried to tell.
The only evil of the word is the one in the hearth of mens
|
| nobinobita
215th Post
Frequent Customer
| "Re(3):Re(10):Amano book question" , posted Wed 28 Nov 02:13
quote:
So, yeah. Philosophy is kinda complicated, and I'm not sure I could explain myself better even in my native language, primarily because I'm a moron.
Wow Iggy,
Thank you very much for that detailed window into your mind. You definitely explained yourself very clearly (and non moronically). I'm very impressed by how you see things from the inside and outside of multiple cultural perspectives. I agree with you 100% that words and concepts are tricky and don't always translate well between languages and cultures and when they are translated its often through a culturally biased filter (by which i don't mean racist, so much as people fill in the blanks with their own experience which might not actually be relevant). Of course, there's also the flipside of the coin where people exoticize foreign concepts so much as to take away the basic humanity behind them.
In any case, I really appreciate your explanation of your viewpoint on art.
You seem like a genuinely "open minded" person, which is rare.
quote:
i've never considered nostalgia in that way. it makes me rethink a lot of things
Alright! Positive influence w00t! I'm glad I could make you feel that way.
quote:
That's not art, and if that is good art; then the author is not the person in question, that's just a stupidly huge cosmic coincidence
Your comment reminds me of a performance art piece I once saw. This girl set up a blank canvas with some paint and brushes in hand. She started off by painting some simple trees and clouds, but then grew frustrated and "liberated" herself by throwing down the brush and using her fingers to make abstract swirls on the canvas. She was trying to make a statement on moving beyond conventional approaches. After the piece I pointed out to her that her abstract lines were essentially the same swirls as the ones she'd used for her happy trees. They were of the same length, width and overall tempo because she didn't have much control over her art to begin with. She was not happy with me.
Oh and I didn't mean to paraphrase you to equate "random" with "abstract." I don't think that's what you meant. There are tons of abstract art pieces that are very controlled and powerful.
quote:
I don't think you should generalize everything into the category of "western"
I agree. The use of that word is a guilty pleasure of mine. I just like making white folk feel marginalized. I apologize for its use on this board though. This is surely the most civilized message board on the internet.
quote:
Hey, I grew up on those, too. Although I'm not Chinese, but neither am I a westerner.
I'm Chinese, but that's one of many cultures I've grown up in. I'm not trying to make anything exclusive to any culture. I think it's great that I've been able to connect with people through Dragonball in every country I've ever spent much time in. The Shonen spirit is something that exists within all cultures, and it's nice to have certain cartoons or games or comics bring out those shared values.
quote:
The future of art is Pixar and dead sharks encased in a glass box!
I've seen the future, and it's grim.
|
| Maese Spt 391th Post
Silver Customer
| "Re(5):Re(10):Amano book question" , posted Fri 30 Nov 00:39
While I have always thought of "Art" as a very subjective question, I must admit I find this topic fascinating. Even Adorno got mentioned. This is the Cafe at its best, indeed!
However, when I read such debates about if this or that guy being a "true" artist or just a good craftsman, I cannot help but fantasizing about a young Botticelli being ostracized by the artistic stablishment of his time for daring to paint images of nekkid women. Or I remember how nobody gave a damn for Van Gogh's stuff back in his day.
Heck, nowadays even the Edo period whore catalogues and hentai manga are on the museums regarded as high art, and so are Toulouse Lautrec's advertisements. Don't get me wrong, I love both ukiyoe and impressionism stuff, but I do wonder what would a regular XIX century Edo or Paris dweller think about the cult status those "fancy doodles" have attained today...
Actually, all art is quite uselsess.
マツケン サンバ!!!!
|
| Ishmael 3005th Post
Platinum Carpet V.I.P- Board Master
| "Re(6):Re(10):Amano book question" , posted Fri 30 Nov 01:08
Appropos of nothing, I came across this quote while reading the article "Pure Quidditas or Geek Chic? Cultism as Discernment" by Greg Taylor. I rather liked the way it summed up the different rules and expectations that are applied to high and low culture.
If we cannot quite seem to acknowledge the presence of engagement, fandom and fun within high culture, we have an equally difficult time acknowledging our routine subjection of pop products to aesthetic criteria such as wholeness, richness, organizational interest, intensity of feeling, and verisimilitude. The countercultural gesture -with its protective veil- still appeals to us, in part because it actually allows us to avoid taking pop culture too seriously. Considering a pop text as "pure Quidditas" lets us off the hook of real comparative discernment by couching evaluation in terms of heroic pointlessness versus crass opportunism, marginality versus mainstream, us versus them. In the end it's not about the work, it's about the nostalgic comforts of the personal past in the face of the looming uncertainties of a collective future.
|
|
|
"Amano book question" , posted Wed 21 Nov 08:28
"Re(4):Amano book question" , posted Thu 22 Nov 06:11
