#it's like. uninteresting systems given interest through rules that are supposed to be questioned or broken | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

pebblysand · 3 years

Text

[the thoughts on canon-compliance you did not ask for.]

last night between 2 and 3 in the morning (look, i couldn’t sleep, got up to write, then got caught up, okay? don’t judge me for my terrible sleeping patterns please) i had a super interesting discussion with a few people on the hinny discord channel about the definition of canon-compliant-ness. i think this is fascinating because to be honest, before getting into the hp fandom, i didn’t even think this was something one could disagree about. to me there was what was canon, and what wasn’t. a very black-and-white sort of system. i’m finding that it’s not.

through the discussions that i’ve had both on my fics and other people’s fics, it seems that i can narrow down - in the hp fandom - three elements of canon.

i. the events of the books/films

now, as a general disclaimer, you can obviously argue about whether the films are ‘canon.’ you can also argue whether cursed child is canon. there’s a lot of elements which differ between those and lots of opinions about how to look at them. personally, i tend to ignore cursed child. as to the books v. films, i pick and choose what suits my story more. generally, that’ll be the books. but for instance, i’m writing a harry&hermione friendship one shot right now, and there are a lot of movie-isms in that story because that is an aspect that was more explored in the films. however, for the purposes of this post, i’m mainly considering the source material to be the seven books. nothing more or less.

having said that, to me personally, that’s what ‘canon’ is: the events of the story and the characters that gravitate around those events, as described in the source material. things like: tom riddle killing lily and james, or harry, ron and hermione rescuing the philosopher’s stone. anything departing from that is, de facto, an ‘au.’ the whole world of what-if scenarios: what if Harry was sorted into slytherin, what if dudley was a wizard, all of those, to me, are aus.

generally, both as a reader and a writer, those are not scenarios i’m particularly drawn to. my default answer to those what-if scenarios is: ‘well, if harry is sorted into slytherin, there’s no story.’ or at the very least, there’s no story as i know it, and if there’s no story as i know it, then i’d rather read/write original fiction. it’s obviously a very personal preference and there are exceptions to this preference. i loved the changeling [1] for instance, and love the self-aware style of dirgewithoutmusic’s aus [2]. but as a general rule, that is not my preferred genre.

now, aside from the what-if scenarios, there’s also the question of filling in the gaps of the story itself. like, i find it interesting that we only make tsunamis [3] is labelled as ‘canon-compliant’ because i get the feeling that a lot of people would disagree that a fic in which hermione is harry’s first kiss is canon compliant. but, by exploiting the silence sometimes left by the author and turning it to your advantage, are you writing an au? is a negative space canon? is silence canon?

again, as a matter of personal opinion, i would not push my definition of canon-compliance as including blank spaces. to me, as long as it does not contradict the letter of the text, adding in events to the books to suit your story (i’ll address character in point ii) does not make your fic an au. to give another example that was brought up to me regarding my own work, i don’t believe that the events described in chapter nine of castles [4] are au because they exist in a blank space of the books. the fact that harry didn’t notice the 1:1s between ginny and amycus doesn’t mean they didn’t happen, it just means that they’re not in the positive space described by the books.

ii. the characters/characterisation

(as a quick vocab note, please note that below, i’m using the terms ‘ooc’ to mean that the characterisation of a character in a fic is not canon-compliant. they’re synonyms to me.)

now, while the above was pretty straight forward, i believe that this is where i perhaps differ from the masses in my interpretation of what “canon-compliance” means. more i discuss with people, the more i realise that i don’t really think there’s a real ‘canon’ characterisation. or at least not in the big things. like, yeah, it’s canon that harry likes treacle tart, because that’s a fact. but anything that is down to psychology or perspective of the character is, to me, generally up for grabs.

as a human, i believe that there’s things that people do, events that they go through, that condition them to act a certain way. while there is a core to every human being, i personally believe that in life, anyone would basically be capable of doing anything, given the right circumstances. i’ve recently - rightfully - been told my writing is all about the power of choice in our life, the reasons why we make those choices and the people those choices lead us to be. for example, do i think i might murder someone tomorrow? probably not. do i think i might be capable of murdering someone in wartime? perhaps? i don’t know, that’s not the world i live in and my life choices have not lead me to find out the answer to that. however, my point is: to me, good ‘characterisation’ is down to the circumstances and choices outlined in any work of fiction. hence, good characterisation is essentially, to me, equal to good writing.

i often say that good writing could make me believe anything and i mean it. i don’t tend to gravitate towards these fics because these ships are not my personal taste but i genuinely believe that good writing could make me believe in drarry or rarry if it tried. it’s funny because over the course of the discussion yesterday on discord, this was brought up ‘well, no one tags drarry as canon compliant,’ and i’m kind of like, i don’t know whether or not they do because i don’t read it but if they did and none of it contradicted the events as detailed in the books, perhaps it could be? like, that would take really good writing (imo), but good writing has - on occasion - made me believe in dramione a couple of times, so why not? in ‘til the sirens come calling [5], good writing made me 100% believe that harry and hermione would have an affair together. in we only make tsunamis [3], it makes me believe that they had this quiet little relationship building throughout hogwarts that we never knew about.

now, though, i suppose the question isn’t: do i believe it? the question is: is it canon? and, i think that’s where i differ from most people because to me, it is. to take ‘til the sirens come calling [5] as an example, i believe the fic is an au because hermione marries victor krum in the end. that’s going against the hard fact presented by the epilogue, and thus makes it an au. but i don’t believe the concept of a harmony affair is inherently au, because nothing is inherently au, character-wise. it’s about how you write it. how those people get to that place. that’s what makes canon-compliantness, in my opinion.

for example, for that fic, truth be told, we don’t know what those nineteen years include per canon, so they could very much include an h/hr affair. and whilst i don’t believe that the characters as they are in the books would have an affair together, i believe that the characters as they are presented in the fic, with the events and hardships that they go through, definitely would. good writing, to me, is - in part - recognising that characters are moving on a spectrum and that whilst their decisions/actions might not make sense in book-verse, they make sense in fic-verse. good writing is convincingly moving your characters from book-verse to fic-verse, and it not feeling ‘off.’

if it does feel off, that is bad writing to me, and that is also ooc-ness/non-canon compliant. it means that for whatever reason, the writer has not successfully transitioned and explained said transition through the events outlined in the story. with the right prose, you could make me believe draco decided to take on a career as a ballerina dancer after the war, and it would still be ‘canon-compliant’ to me. on the other hand, i have read fics (i won’t name them because that would be shit and also i don’t keep track of my ‘bad’ reads) where harry, ginny, hermione, or ron all act according to book canon and yet, their motivations felt off to me and completely ooc because the writing didn’t successfully lure me in. specifically, there was a lack of character evolution that i found uninteresting. i read mostly post-war stuff because i want to see my characters grow up [6].

as a last, additional note on characters, i also think that the characters in a story only exist within the prism of how we view them. this means that to me, locking my own understanding of a character's personality as 'canon' is particularly difficult because my understanding of a character is unique. i believe there are as many harry-s or ginny-s or hermione-s as there are readers. so i think saying someone's interpretation of a character isn't canon-compliant is odd because i don't actually believe there's any wrong or right answer. as i said, do i believe it likely that draco would become a professional ballerina? no. but if that works within your understanding of his character as described in the books, who am i to say that is or isn't canon compliant? i'll admit, the idea makes me sort of lol though.

iii. tone

lastly, i’ve come to find (in potter particularly) that canon-compliance might include tone. as in: hp is a story that is a) written in a certain style and b) written for children/young adults.

regarding style at a), this is honestly the main reason why it took me 15 years to write potter fic, despite the fact that i’ve been a fan for even longer than that. i genuinely thought you had to write like jkr. and i, well, don’t write like jkr. i love the books, but i don’t even particularly like her style. i like: camus, and sorj chalandon, and sally rooney, and dirgewithoutmusic and copper_dust [7]. i have zero ambition to write like jkr and don’t particularly want to read stuff that is written like her stuff either. it’s a style that imo works for her, but it doesn’t work for me as written by other people. i don’t particularly think you need to stick to her style to be canon-compliant.

which brings me onto my actual point: b) hp is a story written for children. young adults perhaps, for the later books. it sometimes explores dark themes but the writing style, the tone, etc. is lighthearted enough that it appeals to a younger audience. there’s snogging but there’s no sex, there’s violence but the torture is mostly off-screen, etc. issues like sexual assault, substance abuse, etc. aren’t explicitely brought up in the books, although they would one hundred percent fit in a book about a war that wasn’t necessarily aimed at children. the question is whether this setting and tone is part of what we call ‘canon-compliance.’

honestly, i don’t know. i didn’t think so until it was brought up to me that castles might be a dark!au and i was like: maybe? like, if you want it to be? i know what i like to read in fanfic: i love the exploration of serious themes that were not explored in the books, or explored differently due to the fact that they were written for children. one thing i will say and insist on is that i don’t think castles is all dark. i actually make a point of having lighthearted moments in each and every chapter, even just a notch, because i am attached to the fact that life as a concept is a mixture of good and bad, and you could laugh at the funeral of someone you loved, again in the right circumstances. but yeah, to me the post-war world is dark. so if tone is part of canon-compliance, then yeah in that way castles (as well as most of the stuff i read, to be honest), is a dark!au.

as a last side note, i’m not sure what that means for my other, lighter stuff though. like are the wolf’s just a puppy [8] or slipped [9] more canon-compliant than castles? i never thought about it in those terms but perhaps? it really opens up a world of questions in my mind and i don’t really have the answers to them.

conclusion:

so in sum, as a reader, what i mean as ‘canon compliant’ is basically a) the events as described in the source material and b) the characterisation of characters as they are at the start of the fic. if character evolution is sufficiently justified and well-written in the following thousands of words that the fic has, then said characterisation can still be canon-compliant, even if the characters act different than they would have in the source material itself. i’m a fan of good writing and good writing can make me buy into literally anything. it takes me places that i've never been before and convinces me that those places are the ones i should be in.

as a writer, i hope that regardless of 'compliance,' whatever i write at least makes ‘sense’ to people within the universe, even if they don’t consider it canon-compliant, per se. i feel like i can’t really be the judge of that. from the discussions we had last night, i feel like there are as many versions of what is and isn't canon-compliant as there are people.

---

[1] the changeling by annerb

[2] the boy with a scar series by dirgewithoutmusic

[3] we only make tsunamis by disOrdely

[4] castles by yours truly

[5] ‘til the sirens come calling by vexmybones

[6] as a side note and to take my own stuff as an another example, i totally agree that harry in castles isn’t harry in the books. i don’t think there’s much debate to be had in that assertion. i wrote him like this frankly because every other fic i’d read didn’t. they often had him sort of continue to be perfectly himself after the war, which i felt wasn’t speaking to me on a deeper level. imo, i think the war’s done a lot of scarring and the fic is about him growing into a new version of himself. so, to me, if i get a comment that says ‘i don’t think harry would act this way but i really love your writing’ it’s somewhat flattering but also confusing because i don’t really understand how one can enjoy the writing but not the characterisation. to me, they’re so intrinsically linked. what the comment tells me is: i think you did a very poor job at explaining character evolution and justifying character x’s [harry’s] choices but i still like your writing, somehow? i suppose that’s nice, but it doesn’t particularly compute in my brain. like, if the character feels off, it means the writing feels off and thus, why are you still reading? i appreciate all and every comment that i get but it doesn’t mean they always make sense in my own brain. if i’m honest, these comments often send me into an ocean of self-doubt about how shit my writing must be.

[7] copper_dust’s work and profile.

[8] the wolf’s just a puppy (and the door’s double locked), again by yours truly

[9] slipped (and said something sort of like your name), same.

#writing #fic writing #canon compliant #the meaning of words #pebblysand goes off a tangent #also general disclaimer that these are my thoughts #there's no wrong or right answer #it's just my own thoughts about the meanings of words

10 notes · View notes

rasoir-national · 4 years

Text

This was bound to happen : I’m talking about immigration law

@ghostplantss i don't know v much about french immigration law would you tell me about it? i'm v curious?

Oh wow. First tea, and now this ? Either you are my secret Santa, or my enabler.

So let me tell you about the passion of my life, Immigration and refugee law, and the fuckery this country has made of it.

The way a city, community, country treats the “other” is one of the oldest legal questions in the History of Humanity. From Antique Greek cities to the Jus Gentium of the Roman Empire, laws concerning foreigners might be the first form of international law known to man. In many ways, it’s by acknowledging the existence of “others”, by giving and restricting their rights, that a social group both truly asserts itself as a “political community”, yet acknowledges the transcending quality of “humanity” of the outsider.

Nowadays, this question is as politically charged as ever : the way a country regards foreigners, welcomes them, rejects them, is one of the most interesting ways you can define the country, one of the ways the country sees itself. By the way we treat the one who is not “us”, we highlight which rights we consider to be inherent to humanity in and of itself, as well as which ones we consider intrinsically rooted in our identity as “citizen”.

And all this proud History, all this contemporary tension, makes Immigration law fascinating to FUCKING NO ONE.

Look, one thing you have to know about lawyers is how much they love intellectual wankery. A nicer way to put it would be to say lawyers love systems. And theory. And generalisation. And categorizing. They like to look at a set of rules and see a pattern, a logic, a paradigm. They like to be able to neatly present it in two titles, each divided in two subtitles, each divided in two sections, and repeat that until they run out of microsoft font points.

And Immigration law... It’s not that. It’s not that at all. It’s the opposite of that. It’s a law that’s almost entirely dictated by conjoncture, by what a government needs it to say, by whichever concept they’re going to twist then to suit their needs. Whatever few theoritical concepts Immigration law might have been based on have been destroyed by years of either haphazardous or plainly malignant reforms, often both.

And not only does that mean that this at this point is an intensely, punitively complex law, it has also become - if it hasn’t always been - illogical and incoherent. The only “logic” behind it anymore is how much it can be weaponized against its subjects - foreigners. Because that’s the only thing that politicians care about, and because lawyers and especially academics have pretty much given up on it, leaving the terrain free for the former. You have to realize, in terms of pure numbers, Immigration law is the most practiced law in the country. It represents almost a third of all disputes. Yet it is taught in NO university in France. Not a single one. There are no courses, no grad school, no thesis program about immigration law in all of France. There is no money in Immigration law : almost all involved subjects are destitute. There is no intellectual curiosity, because the discipline, from a theoretical point of view, is pretty uninteresting. There isn’t even public interest, because deceptively, the general public hears so much about immigration from either ignorant or ill-intentioned people, that getting through the complexity of the topic is immensely complicated and unrewarding.

Lawyers, for the most part, have deserted the topic for selfish reasons, despite the fact that this is perhaps where they were most needed to make sure fundamental rules were enforced, that politics didn’t come in the way of good justice. They abandoned the most vulnerable subjects of law to the whims of lawmakers and political interests. That’s unforgiveable.

So as a result, Immigration law today mostly resembles a cat-and-mouse game where the law sets up as many traps as possible for the immigrant to fall into, with dozens of obstacles to navigate to finally, finally be able to legally settle in a country you might be have been living in for several decades. There are specific stay rules for retirees. That’s a thing. Every rule is meant to exclude as many people as possible. As a result, immigrants must get increasingly creative or even downright shifty in order to qualify for a stay. And in turn, public opinion will yell and say they are manipulating the system - well, duh. We’ve made a system in which it’s impossible to win fair and square and then we criticize immigrants for trying to game it.

Let’s have just one example : demands of admission because of sickness. French law categorizes different reasons for an immigrant to be admitted to live on french soil for a little while : study, work, family matters, and health. France has a very good health system compared to the worldwide standard, so many people come here to receive treatment they might not be able to benefit from in their country of origin for various reasons. Some people already don’t think that’s a reason for welcoming them, but fuck those people. Anyway, there are many, many people who will ask for permission to stay on the grounds of an “invisible” illness : depression, PTSD, personality disorder... all of which are very difficult to prove. Before 2017, the prefect had to decide based on the opinion of a doctor from the regional authority after they’d met with the author of the request. But the administration quickly realized that doctors tend to have that pesky thing called deontology or even - perish the thought ! - empathy. So there was a reform, and now the way it works is the ill immigrant goes to a doctor who writes a report, then mails it to the person’s lawyer, who then mails it to a doctor that will do a second report based on that report, and will send that second report to a group of 3 doctors who, on the sole basis of that document, will advise the prefect on whether or not the person is ill, and whether or not they could have access to treatment in their country. And when I say advise, I mean they mail a form with boxes checked. That’s it. No text. So we have a prefect, who’s not a doctor, making a decision about the health situation of a person based on a box-based form filled by doctors who have never met the person, who themselves are judging based on the report of another doctor who has no met the person either, this last doctor writing based on the report of another doctor who might have met the person once. And all of this can take up to a year. That’s time during which the immigrant cannot work, or receive benefits. And then, if the prefect decides against letting the immigrant stay, then they have only 2 months to challenge that decision, otherwise after those 2 months have passed, they can be arrested, incarcerated and deported at any time.

So given all that, is it any wonder that immigrants tend to “discover” illness after illness and constantly ask for stays based on that ? This system is so random and unfair, that all you can really do is try and try again hoping something will eventually stick. So now you have people complaining that immigrants are faking mental illness in mass, causing prejudice to the “real” mentally ill immigrants. And yes, that’s the effect. But make no mistake : the cause is how difficult it is for an immigrant to have their illness acknowledged when it’s not something “extreme” enough to have you cross the border on a gurney. Because it’s not enough to google “availability of x medication in x country” to make sure the person can actually access treatment in their country of origin.

So that’s the hypocrisy infusing (haha, tea joke) the whole system. And on top of that, the procedure is getting more complicated with every reform : miss one deadline, fill out one form wrong, and you’re out. And please remember we’re dealing with people who for the vast majority do not speak french (the ONLY language allowed in administrative matters according to the Constitution) and know nothing of our administrative system. It’s up to the person’s lawyer to basically map out the life of each of their client. And because there is no money in immigration law - you only get paid in judicial aid from the state - there aren’t many immigration lawyers. You have to do this out of conviction, cuz you’re certainly not doing it for the money or career opportunities. In the practice I interned at last year, each lawyer would at all times manage on average 50 to 80 active cases. And let’s be clear, a lot of them are assholes, because lawyers in general tend to be assholes. But the work they do in downright heroic.

So that’s where I come in to fix it all, right ? Yeah, no. This entire system is fucked, and given what the world looks like right now, it might be for a while. I’m under no delusion that I can do anything to change that. My goal is to help the way I can : I want to become an administrative judge, the ones who are in charge of examining administrative decisions regarding immigrants. This type of challenge represents roughly 50% of the activity of any administrative tribunal : every chamber, no matter their specialty, has to do a little of it, otherwise the system is so backed up it would collapse. Some of those judges do amazing work, and are some of the most compassionate people I’ve ever met. Some of them are not. Most of them are plain bored by this type of claim, because they’re repetitive, not really technical from a legal standpoint and always depressing. And a handful of them have ties to the far-right and are there just to expel as many immigrants as possible. So yeah, if all goes well I’ll be a judge in a few years, and I’ll be one of the only ones who came to the job because of immigration law, not in spite of it. It’s not bragging on my part, it’s just a sad fact. Judges at the tribunal where I’ve worked had a schedule for who was supposed to be in charge of new immigration claims arriving, and some judges would hide from court reporters in order not to get attributed cases that arrived right before their shift was over. So yeah, if I can be a small drop in the bucket and be someone who actually looks at these cases with the explicit intent of finding a reason to approve the claim, that’ll be good enough for me. Because Immigration law, or at least what we’ve made of it, might not be “interesting” but it’s goddamn important, and people should pay attention to it.

#law stuff #immigration law #well this got personal #I don't know if any of that was what you were looking for but #yeah #i just love this topic so much #there is so much good to do #and so few people care #it's a national shame

7 notes · View notes

riusugoi · 6 years

Text

Paragraphs on Conceptual Art By Sol Lewitt

I will refer to the kind of art in which I am involved as conceptual art. In conceptual art the idea or concept is the most important aspect of the work. When an artist uses a conceptual form of art, it means that all of the planning and decisions are made beforehand and the execution is a perfunctory affair. The idea becomes a machine that makes the art. This kind of art is not theoretical or illustrative of theories; it is intuitive, it is involved with all types of mental processes and it is purposeless. It is usually free from the dependence on the skill of the artist as a craftsman. It is the objective of the artist who is concerned with conceptual art to make his work mentally interesting to the spectator, and therefore usually he would want it to become emotionally dry. There is no reason to suppose, however, that the conceptual artist is out to bore the viewer. It is only the expectation of an emotional kick, to which one conditioned to expressionist art is accustomed, that would deter the viewer from perceiving this art.

Conceptual art is not necessarily logical. The logic of a piece or series of pieces is a device that is used at times, only to be ruined. Logic may be used to camouflage the real intent of the artist, to lull the viewer into the belief that he understands the work, or to infer a paradoxical situation (such as logic vs. illogic). Some ideas are logical in conception and illogical perceptually. The ideas need not be complex. Most ideas that are successful are ludicrously simple. Successful ideas generally have the appearance of simplicity because they seem inevitable. In terms of ideas the artist is free even to surprise himself. Ideas are discovered by intuition. What the work of art looks like isn’t too important. It has to look like something if it has physical form. No matter what form it may finally have it must begin with an idea. It is the process of conception and realization with which the artist is concerned. Once given physical reality by the artist the work is open to the perception of all, including the artist. (I use the word perception to mean the apprehension of the sense data, the objective understanding of the idea, and simultaneously a subjective interpretation of both). The work of art can be perceived only after it is completed.

Art that is meant for the sensation of the eye primarily would be called perceptual rather than conceptual. This would include most optical, kinetic, light, and color art.

Since the function of conception and perception are contradictory (one pre-, the other post fact) the artist would mitigate his idea by applying subjective judgment to it. If the artist wishes to explore his idea thoroughly, then arbitrary or chance decisions would be kept to a minimum, while caprice, taste and others whimsies would be eliminated from the making of the art. The work does not necessarily have to be rejected if it does not look well. Sometimes what is initially thought to be awkward will eventually be visually pleasing.

To work with a plan that is preset is one way of avoiding subjectivity. It also obviates the necessity of designing each work in turn. The plan would design the work. Some plans would require millions of variations, and some a limited number, but both are finite. Other plans imply infinity. In each case, however, the artist would select the basic form and rules that would govern the solution of the problem. After that the fewer decisions made in the course of completing the work, the better. This eliminates the arbitrary, the capricious, and the subjective as much as possible. This is the reason for using this method.

When an artist uses a multiple modular method he usually chooses a simple and readily available form. The form itself is of very limited importance; it becomes the grammar for the total work. In fact, it is best that the basic unit be deliberately uninteresting so that it may more easily become an intrinsic part of the entire work. Using complex basic forms only disrupts the unity of the whole. Using a simple form repeatedly narrows the field of the work and concentrates the intensity to the arrangement of the form. This arrangement becomes the end while the form becomes the means.

Conceptual art doesn’t really have much to do with mathematics, philosophy, or nay other mental discipline. The mathematics used by most artists is simple arithmetic or simple number systems. The philosophy of the work is implicit in the work and it is not an illustration of any system of philosophy.

It doesn’t really matter if the viewer understands the concepts of the artist by seeing the art. Once it is out of his hand the artist has no control over the way a viewer will perceive the work. Different people will understand the same thing in a different way.

Recently there has been much written about minimal art, but I have not discovered anyone who admits to doing this kind of thing. There are other art forms around called primary structures, reductive, ejective, cool, and mini-art. No artist I know will own up to any of these either. Therefore I conclude that it is part of a secret language that art critics use when communicating with each other through the medium of art magazines. Mini-art is best because it reminds one of miniskirts and long-legged girls. It must refer to very small works of art. This is a very good idea. Perhaps “mini-art” shows could be sent around the country in matchboxes. Or maybe the mini-artist is a very small person; say less than five feet tall. If so, much good work will be found in the primary schools (primary school primary structures).

If the artist carries through his idea and makes it into visible form, then all the steps in the process are of importance. The idea itself, even if not made visual, is as much a work of art as any finished product. All intervening steps –scribbles, sketches, drawings, failed works, models, studies, thoughts, conversations– are of interest. Those that show the thought process of the artist are sometimes more interesting than the final product.

Determining what size a piece should be is difficult. If an idea requires three dimensions then it would seem any size would do. The question would be what size is best. If the thing were made gigantic then the size alone would be impressive and the idea may be lost entirely. Again, if it is too small, it may become inconsequential. The height of the viewer may have some bearing on the work and also the size of the space into which it will be placed. The artist may wish to place objects higher than the eye level of the viewer, or lower. I think the piece must be large enough to give the viewer whatever information he needs to understand the work and placed in such a way that will facilitate this understanding. (Unless the idea is of impediment and requires difficulty of vision or access).

Space can be thought of as the cubic area occupied by a three-dimensional volume. Any volume would occupy space. It is air and cannot be seen. It is the interval between things that can be measured. The intervals and measurements can be important to a work of art. If certain distances are important they will be made obvious in the piece. If space is relatively unimportant it can be regularized and made equal (things placed equal distances apart) to mitigate any interest in interval. Regular space might also become a metric time element, a kind of regular beat or pulse. When the interval is kept regular whatever is irregular gains more importance.

Architecture and three-dimensional art are of completely opposite natures. The former is concerned with making an area with a specific function. Architecture, whether it is a work of art or not, must be utilitarian or else fail completely. Art is not utilitarian. When three-dimensional art starts to take on some of the characteristics, such as forming utilitarian areas, it weakens its function as art. When the viewer is dwarfed by the larger size of a piece this domination emphasizes the physical and emotive power of the form at the expense of losing the idea of the piece.

New materials are one of the great afflictions of contemporary art. Some artists confuse new materials with new ideas. There is nothing worse than seeing art that wallows in gaudy baubles. By and large most artists who are attracted to these materials are the ones who lack the stringency of mind that would enable them to use the materials well. It takes a good artist to use new materials and make them into a work of art. The danger is, I think, in making the physicality of the materials so important that it becomes the idea of the work (another kind of expressionism).

Three-dimensional art of any kind is a physical fact. The physicality is its most obvious and expressive content. Conceptual art is made to engage the mind of the viewer rather than his eye or emotions. The physicality of a three-dimensional object then becomes a contradiction to its non-emotive intent. Color, surface, texture, and shape only emphasize the physical aspects of the work. Anything that calls attention to and interests the viewer in this physicality is a deterrent to our understanding of the idea and is used as an expressive device. The conceptual artist would want to ameliorate this emphasis on materiality as much as possible or to use it in a paradoxical way (to convert it into an idea). This kind of art, then, should be stated with the greatest economy of means. Any idea that is better stated in two dimensions should not be in three dimensions. Ideas may also be stated with numbers, photographs, or words or any way the artist chooses, the form being unimportant.

These paragraphs are not intended as categorical imperatives, but the ideas stated are as close as possible to my thinking at this time. These ideas are the result of my work as an artist and are subject to change as my experience changes. I have tried to state them with as much clarity as possible. If the statements I make are unclear it may mean the thinking is unclear. Even while writing these ideas there seemed to be obvious inconsistencies (which I have tried to correct, but others will probably slip by). I do not advocate a conceptual form of art for all artists. I have found that it has worked well for me while other ways have not. It is one way of making art; other ways suit other artists. Nor do I think all conceptual art merits the viewer’s attention. Conceptual art is good only when the idea is good.

#notes

1 note · View note

onesunnyboi-blog · 6 years

Note

colton + all ! :o

Okay!! so here is Colton!!

What’s the maximum amount of time your character can sit still with nothing to do?a while - sometimes he has to go on reconnaissance patrols and sit for hours watching the enemy. however if nothing fruitful is coming of sitting about still for hours, he can get a little agitated. How easy is it for your character to laugh? not very - he’s very stoic. his features are like stone and his humour has been diminished over many years of facing war. How do they put themselves to bed at night (reading, singing, thinking?)ha ha ha. pretty to assume he sleeps. if out on a mission or facing a tremendous battle, he doesn’t sleep all too often and will try to count himself down into sleep from twenty. How easy is it to earn their trust?not very. he holds everyone at arms length. although, the team he is with, the other Exalts, he trusts wholeheartedly. once gained it’s not easily shaken (but can be easily lost if you betray him; he’s not one for second chances) Do they consider laws flexible, or immovable?that depends; being a soldier he has to follow rules rigidly, but if he sees that it would be immoral to follow the law and so breaking a rule or two may be the better option, i don’t think he’d face any doubt and would go ahead and break them. What triggers nostalgia for them, most often? Do they enjoy that feeling?there’s a scent of lavender that gives him nostalgia - it triggers memories of being young and warm and safe with his family; not that he really remembers who they are. he just sees fuzzy faces and hears ghostly whispers... but he knows those days as a child were his happiest. it’s a kind of bittersweet feeling, one he doesn’t like to be exposed to often, in fear that he’ll lose his will to face the wars. What were they told to stop/start doing most often as a child?he can’t really remember... he’s certain his father would often tell him to “stand straight, shoulders back - you’re supposed to be a proud boy”. Do they swear? Do they remember their first swear word?yeah, he swears - but he’s naturally a man of few words so he doesn’t swear all that often. it’s more so when he’s getting emotional/specifically angry. he doesn’t remember his first swear word, but i can guarantee that it was “you’re a left bollock, Junior.” to a fellow Exalt-in-training. What lie do they most frequently remember telling? Does it haunt them?“Everything’s going to be fine. You’re going to make it.” it haunts his every waking hour. How do they cope with confusion (seek clarification, pretend they understand, etc)?he’ll kinda just crinkle up his nose and then huff. to which many tut and explain again (not common though) What color do they think they look best in? Do they actually look best in that color?black - simple and like his soulWhat animal do they fear most?i don’t think he’s had much contact with animals - he’s not been back to earth in years. How do they speak? Is what they say usually thought of on the spot, or do they rehearse it in their mind first?he’s a natural leader and his words are chosen very meticulously - he doesn’t need to rehearse what he’s going to say, oftentimes there’s no room for that; he’s supposed to lead a team in the middle of a raging war, he can’t dillydally. What makes their stomach turn?being unable to protect rookies out in the field to give them another chance at living another day. Are they easily embarrassed?nope. What embarrasses them?literally nothing. he takes everything in his stride and it makes it very difficult to do anything to him. What is their favorite number?i don’t think he’d put much thought into this - however 20 seems to be his go-to. If they were asked to explain the difference between romantic and platonic or familial love, how would they do so?he wouldn’t. he hasn’t a clue. all he’s known is fighting. he could explain his not-so-love for that. Why do they get up in the morning? “to protect the galaxy!” which is the motto he’s begrudgingly engraved into his mind. How does jealousy manifest itself in them (they become possessive, they become aloof, etc)? i think he becomes very agitated and can say things that are very cold/mean to the people he is jealous of. How does envy manifest itself in them (they take what they want, they become resentful, etc)? he becomes very resentful - he envies those who get to live a life without the need to worry about when your last day is going to be. he envies those who experience peace daily because he’s out in the world bleeding and fighting for them. Is sex something that they’re comfortable speaking about? To whom? tbh, i doubt he’s thought about it - i don’t think he’s too fussed. he’s more, like, indifferent if it comes up in conversation, easily getting bored of the topic. What are their thoughts on marriage? meh, doesn’t see himself getting married. but he supposes it’s alright.. What is their preferred mode of transportation? they’re called “Hawks” - a type of small, stealth ship that can carry a small team of Exalts into a specified location. it’s a quick entry, a quite ride and the seats can be comfy. What causes them to feel dread? his inability to save othersWould they prefer a lie over an unpleasant truth? he can take an unpleasant truth. don’t lie to him. he’ll fight you over it. Do they usually live up to their own ideals? yes - he holds others to these ideals too and often finds himself disappointed if people don’t follow them. Who are they the most glad to have met? another Exalt called Mandy. she’s super funny, has his back constantly - they’ve both admitted that they see each other as family and that’s a level barely anyone gets to with Colton. HE WOULD DIE FOR HER. she’s also younger than he is, and so if anyone starts to show interest in her, he slides in with narrowed eyes. makes it known he will end whoever it is if they hurt her. Do they have a go-to story in conversation? Or a joke? no, he’s not much of a conversationalist. he lets other people talk. Could they be considered lazy? never - he’s always doing something, whether that be brooding in the corner or going over mission plans and everything in between. How hard is it for them to shake a sense of guilt? very. he’s like atlas, bearing the world on his shoulders and if he loses a soldier, it’s his own personal fault. guilt can stay with him for months. How do they treat the things their friends come to them excited about? Are they supportive? very supportive - with the few words he spares. he may seem uninterested but there’s a shine in his eye at seeing his friends feel emotion other than fear/dread/anger etc. Do they actively seek romance, or do they wait for it to fall into their lap? he doesn’t seek it or wait for it - i don’t think he actually cares for it. Do they have a system for remembering names, long lists of numbers, things that need to go in a certain order (like anagrams, putting things to melodies, etc)? if he likes a person/thing, he’ll just remember it. if he doesn’t like a person he’ll call them every variation of that name he can - remembering lists of numbers is easy bc he has a photographic memory so it kinda just stays in his head without the need to keep going over them. What memory do they revisit the most often? his memories are fuzzy, so i don’t think it’s a visual memory he’ll go to - but as aforementioned, the smell of lavender is something he remembers. How easy is it for them to ignore flaws in other people? very difficult for him and he’ll call people out for their flaws. How sensitive are they to their own flaws?he realises that he’s not perfect and tries to rectify his own flaws. How do they feel about children? what now? he hasn’t seen a child in years! i don’t think he’d know what to do with a child except from hold it at arms length whilst staring at it like a new discovery. tentatively but with apprehension. How badly do they want to reach their end goal? very badly - a world of peace. although he knows deep down that peace may never be achieved; there’s always someone willing to start a fight. If someone asked them to explain their sexuality, how would they do so? he’d shrug and make vague gestures which pretty much sums up his sexuality. although i’m inclined to say he’s aro/ace or both.

QUESTIONS FOR CREATORSA) Why are you excited about this character?because he’s in space and holy shit i love space. also he’s a stoic man that i can call my son. B) What inspired you to create them?Shirokage218 C) Did you have trouble figuring out where they fit in their own story?not really, i’d been mulling over the story but never had characters figured out, so slotting him in was easy. D) Have they always had the same physical appearance, or have you had to edit how they look?tbh i can imagine i’ll change him about a little bit, but he is a new oc so there’s time for improvement yet. E) Are they someone you would get along with? Would they get along with you?i think he’d want to protect me cause i’m weak af. i would be intimidated by him initially but then would feel tremendous pain for him - he’s been through a lot. F) What do you feel when you think of your OC (pride, excitement, frustration, etc)?excitement and sadness - excitement because he as a character to me is cool, but when i think about him actually alive in the world i’ve created, i feel shitty because sorry colton u have a hard life 8) G) What trait of theirs bothers you the most?the inability to laugh. lighten up man geez H) What trait do you admire most?his braveryI) Do you prefer to keep them in their canon universe?yeah, because space. and tbh i don’t think he’d suit anything else. J) Did you have to manipulate or exclude canon factors to allow them to create their character?nope!

Thank you @defenestrata for this ask!! Hope i’ve given more insight in him!!

7 notes · View notes

oliverbel · 4 years

Photo

CONCEPTUAL ART / MINIMALISM

" Paragraphs on Conceptual Art " Sol Lewitt Artforum (June, 1967).

The editor has written me that he is in favor of avoiding “the notion that the artist is a kind of ape that has to be explained by the civilized critic”. This should be good news to both artists and apes. With this assurance I hope to justify his confidence. To use a baseball metaphor (one artist wanted to hit the ball out of the park, another to stay loose at the plate and hit the ball where it was pitched), I am grateful for the opportunity to strike out for myself. I will refer to the kind of art in which I am involved as conceptual art. In conceptual art the idea or concept is the most important aspect of the work. When an artist uses a conceptual form of art, it means that all of the planning and decisions are made beforehand and the execution is a perfunctory affair. The idea becomes a machine that makes the art. This kind of art is not theoretical or illustrative of theories; it is intuitive, it is involved with all types of mental processes and it is purposeless. It is usually free from the dependence on the skill of the artist as a craftsman. It is the objective of the artist who is concerned with conceptual art to make his work mentally interesting to the spectator, and therefore usually he would want it to become emotionally dry. There is no reason to suppose, however, that the conceptual artist is out to bore the viewer. It is only the expectation of an emotional kick, to which one conditioned to expressionist art is accustomed, that would deter the viewer from perceiving this art. Conceptual art is not necessarily logical. The logic of a piece or series of pieces is a device that is used at times, only to be ruined. Logic may be used to camouflage the real intent of the artist, to lull the viewer into the belief that he understands the work, or to infer a paradoxical situation (such as logic vs. illogic). Some ideas are logical in conception and illogical perceptually. The ideas need not be complex. Most ideas that are successful are ludicrously simple. Successful ideas generally have the appearance of simplicity because they seem inevitable. In terms of ideas the artist is free even to surprise himself. Ideas are discovered by intuition. What the work of art looks like isn't too important. It has to look like something if it has physical form. No matter what form it may finally have it must begin with an idea. It is the process of conception and realization with which the artist is concerned. Once given physical reality by the artist the work is open to the perception of al, including the artist. (I use the word perception to mean the apprehension of the sense data, the objective understanding of the idea, and simultaneously a subjective interpretation of both). The work of art can be perceived only after it is completed. Art that is meant for the sensation of the eye primarily would be called perceptual rather than conceptual. This would include most optical, kinetic, light, and color art. Since the function of conception and perception are contradictory (one pre-, the other postfact) the artist would mitigate his idea by applying subjective judgment to it. If the artist wishes to explore his idea thoroughly, then arbitrary or chance decisions would be kept to a minimum, while caprice, taste and others whimsies would be eliminated from the making of the art. The work does not necessarily have to be rejected if it does not look well. Sometimes what is initially thought to be awkward will eventually be visually pleasing. To work with a plan that is preset is one way of avoiding subjectivity. It also obviates the necessity of designing each work in turn. The plan would design the work. Some plans would require millions of variations, and some a limited number, but both are finite. Other plans imply infinity. In each case, however, the artist would select the basic form and rules that would govern the solution of the problem. After that the fewer decisions made in the course of completing the work, the better. This eliminates the arbitrary, the capricious, and the subjective as much as possible. This is the reason for using this method. When an artist uses a multiple modular method he usually chooses a simple and readily available form. The form itself is of very limited importance; it becomes the grammar for the total work. In fact, it is best that the basic unit be deliberately uninteresting so that it may more easily become an intrinsic part of the entire work. Using complex basic forms only disrupts the unity of the whole. Using a simple form repeatedly narrows the field of the work and concentrates the intensity to the arrangement of the form. This arrangement becomes the end while the form becomes the means. Conceptual art doesn't really have much to do with mathematics, philosophy, or nay other mental discipline. The mathematics used by most artists is simple arithmetic or simple number systems. The philosophy of the work is implicit in the work and it is not an illustration of any system of philosophy. It doesn't really matter if the viewer understands the concepts of the artist by seeing the art. Once it is out of his hand the artist has no control over the way a viewer will perceive the work. Different people will understand the same thing in a different way. Recently there has been much written about minimal art, but I have not discovered anyone who admits to doing this kind of thing. There are other art forms around called primary structures, reductive, rejective, cool, and mini-art. No artist I know will own up to any of these either. Therefore I conclude that it is part of a secret language that art critics use when communicating with each other through the medium of art magazines. Mini-art is best because it reminds one of miniskirts and long-legged girls. It must refer to very small works of art. This is a very good idea. Perhaps “mini-art” shows could be sent around the country in matchboxes. Or maybe the mini-artist is a very small person, say under five feet tall. If so, much good work will be found in the primary schools (primary school primary structures). If the artist carries through his idea and makes it into visible form, then all the steps in the process are of importance. The idea itself, even if not made visual, is as much a work of art as any finished product. All intervening steps –scribbles, sketches, drawings, failed works, models, studies, thoughts, conversations– are of interest. Those that show the thought process of the artist are sometimes more interesting than the final product. Determining what size a piece should be is difficult. If an idea requires three dimensions then it would seem any size would do. The question would be what size is best. If the thing were made gigantic then the size alone would be impressive and the idea may be lost entirely. Again, if it is too small, it may become inconsequential. The height of the viewer may have some bearing on the work and also the size of the space into which it will be placed. The artist may wish to place objects higher than the eye level of the viewer, or lower. I think the piece must be large enough to give the viewer whatever information he needs to understand the work and placed in such a way that will facilitate this understanding. (Unless the idea is of impediment and requires difficulty of vision or access). Space can be thought of as the cubic area occupied by a three-dimensional volume. Any volume would occupy space. It is air and cannot be seen. It is the interval between things that can be measured. The intervals and measurements can be important to a work of art. If certain distances are important they will be made obvious in the piece. If space is relatively unimportant it can be regularized and made equal (things placed equal distances apart) to mitigate any interest in interval. Regular space might also become a metric time element, a kind of regular beat or pulse. When the interval is kept regular whatever is ireregular gains more importance. Architecture and three-dimensional art are of completely opposite natures. The former is concerned with making an area with a specific function. Architecture, whether it is a work of art or not, must be utilitarian or else fail completely. Art is not utilitarian. When threedimensional art starts to take on some of the characteristics, such as forming utilitarian areas, it weakens its function as art. When the viewer is dwarfed by the larger size of a piece this domination emphasizes the physical and emotive power of the form at the expense of losing the idea of the piece. New materials are one of the great afflictions of contemporary art. Some artists confuse new materials with new ideas. There is nothing worse than seeing art that wallows in gaudy baubles. By and large most artists who are attracted to these materials are the ones who lack the stringency of mind that would enable them to use the materials well. It takes a good artist to use new materials and make them into a work of art. The danger is, I think, in making the physicality of the materials so important that it becomes the idea of the work (another kind of expressionism). Three-dimensional art of any kind is a physical fact. The physicality is its most obvious and expressive content. Conceptual art is made to engage the mind of the viewer rather than his eye or emotions. The physicality of a three-dimensional object then becomes a contradiction to its non-emotive intent. Color, surface, texture, and shape only emphasize the physical aspects of the work. Anything that calls attention to and interests the viewer in this physicality is a deterrent to our understanding of the idea and is used as an expressive device. The conceptual artist would want o ameliorate this emphasis on materiality as much as possible or to use it in a paradoxical way (to convert it into an idea). This kind of art, then, should be stated with the greatest economy of means. Any idea that is better stated in two dimensions should not be in three dimensions. Ideas may also be stated with numbers, photographs, or words or any way the artist chooses, the form being unimportant. These paragraphs are not intended as categorical imperatives, but the ideas stated are as close as possible to my thinking at this time. These ideas are the result of my work as an artist and are subject to change as my experience changes. I have tried to state them with as much clarity as possible. If the statements I make are unclear it may mean the thinking is unclear. Even while writing these ideas there seemed to be obvious inconsistencies (which I have tried to correct, but others will probably slip by). I do not advocate a conceptual form of art for all artists. I have found that it has worked well for me while other ways have not. It is one way of making art; other ways suit other artists. Nor do I think all conceptual art merits the viewer's attention. Conceptual art is good only when the idea is good. Sentences on Conceptual Art 1. Conceptual artists are mystics rather than rationalists. They leap to conclusions that logic cannot reach. 2. Rational judgements repeat rational judgements. 3. Irrational judgements lead to new experience. 4. Formal art is essentially rational. 5. Irrational thoughts should be followed absolutely and logically. 6. If the artist changes his mind midway through the execution of the piece he compromises the result and repeats past results. 7. The artist's will is secondary to the process he initiates from idea to completion. His wilfulness may only be ego. 8. When words such as painting and sculpture are used, they connote a whole tradition and imply a consequent acceptance of this tradition, thus placing limitations on the artist who would be reluctant to make art that goes beyond the limitations. 9. The concept and idea are different. The former implies a general direction while the latter is the component. Ideas implement the concept. 10. Ideas can be works of art; they are in a chain of development that may eventually find some form. All ideas need not be made physical. 11. Ideas do not necessarily proceed in logical order. They may set one off in unexpected directions, but an idea must necessarily be completed in the mind before the next one is formed. 12. For each work of art that becomes physical there are many variations that do not. 13. A work of art may be understood as a conductor from the artist's mind to the viewer's. But it may never reach the viewer, or it may never leave the artist's mind. 14. The words of one artist to another may induce an idea chain, if they share the same concept. 15. Since no form is intrinsically superior to another, the artist may use any form, from an expression of words (written or spoken) to physical reality, equally. 16. If words are used, and they proceed from ideas about art, then they are art and not literature; numbers are not mathematics. 17. All ideas are art if they are concerned with art and fall within the conventions of art. 18. One usually understands the art of the past by applying the convention of the present, thus misunderstanding the art of the past. 19. The conventions of art are altered by works of art. 20. Successful art changes our understanding of the conventions by altering our perceptions. 21. Perception of ideas leads to new ideas. 22. The artist cannot imagine his art, and cannot perceive it until it is complete. 23. The artist may misperceive (understand it differently from the artist) a work of art but still be set off in his own chain of thought by that misconstrual. 24. Perception is subjective. 25. The artist may not necessarily understand his own art. His perception is neither better nor worse than that of others. 26. An artist may perceive the art of others better than his own. 27. The concept of a work of art may involve the matter of the piece or the process in which it is made. 28. Once the idea of the piece is established in the artist's mind and the final form is decided, the process is carried out blindly. There are many side effects that the artist cannot imagine. These may be used as ideas for new works. 29. The process is mechanical and should not be tampered with. It should run its course. 30. There are many elements involved in a work of art. The most important are the most obvious. 31. If an artist uses the same form in a group of works, and changes the material, one would assume the artist's concept involved the material. 32. Banal ideas cannot be rescued by beautiful execution. 33. It is difficult to bungle a good idea. 34. When an artist learns his craft too well he makes slick art. 35. These sentences comment on art, but are not art. First published in 0-9 ( New York ), 1969, and Art-Language ( England ), May 1969.

1 note · View note

noosphe-re · 7 years

Text

Paragraphs on Conceptual Art

By Sol LeWitt The editor has written me that he is in favor of avoiding “the notion that the artist is a kind of ape that has to be explained by the civilized critic”. This should be good news to both artists and apes. With this assurance I hope to justify his confidence. To use a baseball metaphor (one artist wanted to hit the ball out of the park, another to stay loose at the plate and hit the ball where it was pitched), I am grateful for the opportunity to strike out for myself.

Conceptual art is not necessarily logical. The logic of a piece or series of pieces is a device that is used at times, only to be ruined. Logic may be used to camouflage the real intent of the artist, to lull the viewer into the belief that he understands the work, or to infer a paradoxical situation (such as logic vs. illogic). Some ideas are logical in conception and illogical perceptually. The ideas need not be complex. Most ideas that are successful are ludicrously simple. Successful ideas generally have the appearance of simplicity because they seem inevitable. In terms of ideas the artist is free even to surprise himself. Ideas are discovered by intuition. What the work of art looks like isn’t too important. It has to look like something if it has physical form. No matter what form it may finally have it must begin with an idea. It is the process of conception and realization with which the artist is concerned. Once given physical reality by the artist the work is open to the perception of al, including the artist. (I use the word perception to mean the apprehension of the sense data, the objective understanding of the idea, and simultaneously a subjective interpretation of both). The work of art can be perceived only after it is completed.

Art that is meant for the sensation of the eye primarily would be called perceptual rather than conceptual. This would include most optical, kinetic, light, and color art.

Three-dimensional art of any kind is a physical fact. The physicality is its most obvious and expressive content. Conceptual art is made to engage the mind of the viewer rather than his eye or emotions. The physicality of a three-dimensional object then becomes a contradiction to its non-emotive intent. Color, surface, texture, and shape only emphasize the physical aspects of the work. Anything that calls attention to and interests the viewer in this physicality is a deterrent to our understanding of the idea and is used as an expressive device. The conceptual artist would want o ameliorate this emphasis on materiality as much as possible or to use it in a paradoxical way (to convert it into an idea). This kind of art, then, should be stated with the greatest economy of means. Any idea that is better stated in two dimensions should not be in three dimensions. Ideas may also be stated with numbers, photographs, or words or any way the artist chooses, the form being unimportant.

#conceptual art #art theory #art #abstract art #ideas #creativity #design #essay #Sol LeWitt

148 notes · View notes

fionaharnett · 5 years

Text

Paragraphs on Conceptual Art SOL LEWITT

" Paragraphs on Conceptual Art " Sol Lewitt The editor has written me that he is in favor of avoiding “the notion that the artist is a kind of ape that has to be explained by the civilized critic”. This should be good news to both artists and apes. With this assurance I hope to justify his confidence. To use a baseball metaphor (one artist wanted to hit the ball out of the park, another to stay loose at the plate and hit the ball where it was pitched), I am grateful for the opportunity to strike out for myself. I will refer to the kind of art in which I am involved as conceptual art. In conceptual art the idea or concept is the most important aspect of the work. When an artist uses a conceptual form of art, it means that all of the planning and decisions are made beforehand and the execution is a perfunctory affair. The idea becomes a machine that makes the art. This kind of art is not theoretical or illustrative of theories; it is intuitive, it is involved with all types of mental processes and it is purposeless. It is usually free from the dependence on the skill of the artist as a craftsman. It is the objective of the artist who is concerned with conceptual art to make his work mentally interesting to the spectator, and therefore usually he would want it to become emotionally dry. There is no reason to suppose, however, that the conceptual artist is out to bore the viewer. It is only the expectation of an emotional kick, to which one conditioned to expressionist art is accustomed, that would deter the viewer from perceiving this art. Conceptual art is not necessarily logical. The logic of a piece or series of pieces is a device that is used at times, only to be ruined. Logic may be used to camouflage the real intent of the artist, to lull the viewer into the belief that he understands the work, or to infer a paradoxical situation (such as logic vs. illogic). Some ideas are logical in conception and illogical perceptually. The ideas need not be complex. Most ideas that are successful are ludicrously simple. Successful ideas generally have the appearance of simplicity because they seem inevitable. In terms of ideas the artist is free even to surprise himself. Ideas are discovered by intuition. What the work of art looks like isn't too important. It has to look like something if it has physical form. No matter what form it may finally have it must begin with an idea. It is the process of conception and realization with which the artist is concerned. Once given physical reality by the artist the work is open to the perception of al, including the artist. (I use the word perception to mean the apprehension of the sense data, the objective understanding of the idea, and simultaneously a subjective interpretation of both). The work of art can be perceived only after it is completed. Art that is meant for the sensation of the eye primarily would be called perceptual rather than conceptual. This would include most optical, kinetic, light, and color art. Since the function of conception and perception are contradictory (one pre-, the other postfact) the artist would mitigate his idea by applying subjective judgment to it. If the artist wishes to explore his idea thoroughly, then arbitrary or chance decisions would be kept to a minimum, while caprice, taste and others whimsies would be eliminated from the making of Artforum (June, 1967). the art. The work does not necessarily have to be rejected if it does not look well. Sometimes what is initially thought to be awkward will eventually be visually pleasing. To work with a plan that is preset is one way of avoiding subjectivity. It also obviates the necessity of designing each work in turn. The plan would design the work. Some plans would require millions of variations, and some a limited number, but both are finite. Other plans imply infinity. In each case, however, the artist would select the basic form and rules that would govern the solution of the problem. After that the fewer decisions made in the course of completing the work, the better. This eliminates the arbitrary, the capricious, and the subjective as much as possible. This is the reason for using this method. When an artist uses a multiple modular method he usually chooses a simple and readily available form. The form itself is of very limited importance; it becomes the grammar for the total work. In fact, it is best that the basic unit be deliberately uninteresting so that it may more easily become an intrinsic part of the entire work. Using complex basic forms only disrupts the unity of the whole. Using a simple form repeatedly narrows the field of the work and concentrates the intensity to the arrangement of the form. This arrangement becomes the end while the form becomes the means. Conceptual art doesn't really have much to do with mathematics, philosophy, or nay other mental discipline. The mathematics used by most artists is simple arithmetic or simple number systems. The philosophy of the work is implicit in the work and it is not an illustration of any system of philosophy. It doesn't really matter if the viewer understands the concepts of the artist by seeing the art. Once it is out of his hand the artist has no control over the way a viewer will perceive the work. Different people will understand the same thing in a different way. Recently there has been much written about minimal art, but I have not discovered anyone who admits to doing this kind of thing. There are other art forms around called primary structures, reductive, rejective, cool, and mini-art. No artist I know will own up to any of these either. Therefore I conclude that it is part of a secret language that art critics use when communicating with each other through the medium of art magazines. Mini-art is best because it reminds one of miniskirts and long-legged girls. It must refer to very small works of art. This is a very good idea. Perhaps “mini-art” shows could be sent around the country in matchboxes. Or maybe the mini-artist is a very small person, say under five feet tall. If so, much good work will be found in the primary schools (primary school primary structures). If the artist carries through his idea and makes it into visible form, then all the steps in the process are of importance. The idea itself, even if not made visual, is as much a work of art as any finished product. All intervening steps –scribbles, sketches, drawings, failed works, models, studies, thoughts, conversations– are of interest. Those that show the thought process of the artist are sometimes more interesting than the final product. Determining what size a piece should be is difficult. If an idea requires three dimensions then it would seem any size would do. The question would be what size is best. If the thing were made gigantic then the size alone would be impressive and the idea may be lost entirely. Again, if it is too small, it may become inconsequential. The height of the viewer may have some bearing on the work and also the size of the space into which it will be placed. The artist may wish to place objects higher than the eye level of the viewer, or lower. I think the piece must be large enough to give the viewer whatever information he needs to understand the work and placed in such a way that will facilitate this understanding. (Unless the idea is of impediment and requires difficulty of vision or access). Space can be thought of as the cubic area occupied by a three-dimensional volume. Any volume would occupy space. It is air and cannot be seen. It is the interval between things that can be measured. The intervals and measurements can be important to a work of art. If certain distances are important they will be made obvious in the piece. If space is relatively unimportant it can be regularized and made equal (things placed equal distances apart) to mitigate any interest in interval. Regular space might also become a metric time element, a kind of regular beat or pulse. When the interval is kept regular whatever is ireregular gains more importance. Architecture and three-dimensional art are of completely opposite natures. The former is concerned with making an area with a specific function. Architecture, whether it is a work of art or not, must be utilitarian or else fail completely. Art is not utilitarian. When three- dimensional art starts to take on some of the characteristics, such as forming utilitarian areas, it weakens its function as art. When the viewer is dwarfed by the larger size of a piece this domination emphasizes the physical and emotive power of the form at the expense of losing the idea of the piece. New materials are one of the great afflictions of contemporary art. Some artists confuse new materials with new ideas. There is nothing worse than seeing art that wallows in gaudy baubles. By and large most artists who are attracted to these materials are the ones who lack the stringency of mind that would enable them to use the materials well. It takes a good artist to use new materials and make them into a work of art. The danger is, I think, in making the physicality of the materials so important that it becomes the idea of the work (another kind of expressionism). Three-dimensional art of any kind is a physical fact. The physicality is its most obvious and expressive content. Conceptual art is made to engage the mind of the viewer rather than his eye or emotions. The physicality of a three-dimensional object then becomes a contradiction to its non-emotive intent. Color, surface, texture, and shape only emphasize the physical aspects of the work. Anything that calls attention to and interests the viewer in this physicality is a deterrent to our understanding of the idea and is used as an expressive device. The conceptual artist would want o ameliorate this emphasis on materiality as much as possible or to use it in a paradoxical way (to convert it into an idea). This kind of art, then, should be stated with the greatest economy of means. Any idea that is better stated in two dimensions should not be in three dimensions. Ideas may also be stated with numbers, photographs, or words or any way the artist chooses, the form being unimportant. These paragraphs are not intended as categorical imperatives, but the ideas stated are as close as possible to my thinking at this time. These ideas are the result of my work as an artist and are subject to change as my experience changes. I have tried to state them with as much clarity as possible. If the statements I make are unclear it may mean the thinking is unclear. Even while writing these ideas there seemed to be obvious inconsistencies (which I have tried to correct, but others will probably slip by). I do not advocate a conceptual form of art for all artists. I have found that it has worked well for me while other ways have not. It is one way of making art; other ways suit other artists. Nor do I think all conceptual art merits the viewer's attention. Conceptual art is good only when the idea is good. Sentences on Conceptual Art 1. Conceptual artists are mystics rather than rationalists. They leap to conclusions that logic cannot reach. 2. Rational judgements repeat rational judgements. 3. Irrational judgements lead to new experience. 4. Formal art is essentially rational. 5. Irrational thoughts should be followed absolutely and logically. 6. If the artist changes his mind midway through the execution of the piece he compromises the result and repeats past results. 7. The artist's will is secondary to the process he initiates from idea to completion. His wilfulness may only be ego. 8. When words such as painting and sculpture are used, they connote a whole tradition and imply a consequent acceptance of this tradition, thus placing limitations on the artist who would be reluctant to make art that goes beyond the limitations. 9. The concept and idea are different. The former implies a general direction while the latter is the component. Ideas implement the concept. 10. Ideas can be works of art; they are in a chain of development that may eventually find some form. All ideas need not be made physical. 11. Ideas do not necessarily proceed in logical order. They may set one off in unexpected directions, but an idea must necessarily be completed in the mind before the next one is formed. 12. For each work of art that becomes physical there are many variations that do not. 13. A work of art may be understood as a conductor from the artist's mind to the viewer's. But it may never reach the viewer, or it may never leave the artist's mind. 14. The words of one artist to another may induce an idea chain, if they share the same concept. 15. Since no form is intrinsically superior to another, the artist may use any form, from an expression of words (written or spoken) to physical reality, equally. 16. If words are used, and they proceed from ideas about art, then they are art and not literature; numbers are not mathematics. 17. All ideas are art if they are concerned with art and fall within the conventions of art. 18. One usually understands the art of the past by applying the convention of the present, thus misunderstanding the art of the past. 19. The conventions of art are altered by works of art. 20. Successful art changes our understanding of the conventions by altering our perceptions. 21. Perception of ideas leads to new ideas. 22. The artist cannot imagine his art, and cannot perceive it until it is complete. 23. The artist may misperceive (understand it differently from the artist) a work of art but still be set off in his own chain of thought by that misconstrual. 24. Perception is subjective. 25. The artist may not necessarily understand his own art. His perception is neither better nor worse than that of others. 26. An artist may perceive the art of others better than his own. 27. The concept of a work of art may involve the matter of the piece or the process in which it is made. 28. Once the idea of the piece is established in the artist's mind and the final form is decided, the process is carried out blindly. There are many side effects that the artist cannot imagine. These may be used as ideas for new works. 29. The process is mechanical and should not be tampered with. It should run its course. 30. There are many elements involved in a work of art. The most important are the most obvious. 31. If an artist uses the same form in a group of works, and changes the material, one would assume the artist's concept involved the material. 32. Banal ideas cannot be rescued by beautiful execution. 33. It is difficult to bungle a good idea. 34. When an artist learns his craft too well he makes slick art. 35. These sentences comment on art, but are not art. First published in 0-9 ( New York ), 1969, and Art-Language ( England ), May 1969.

I called my initial mini project 'cheesy'....even though I liked the pictures, and felt the music well, there was something missing. My lecturer said that a slideshow with music would always look slick, and I agree...take away the music and the photos gently mixing into one another and what is left? The essay above was mentioned in our first session of Beyond the Frame, and I know I will refer to it often.

#5IMAG001W #beyondtheframe

0 notes

homeschoolbase · 4 years

Text

Personal experience from a fellow homeschooler: Classical Conversations

Hello all! I'm a fairly new member to this group - I joined out of sheer desperation, as I felt I might be the only one out there who was dissatisfied at both a local and corporate level with CC. What a relief it was to know that I am not the only one who sees that, as the saying goes, the emperor has no clothes. Reading through story after story on here was so refreshing - a guzzle of water after a drought - and I, in turn, wanted to take a minute and share my story in the hopes that anyone stopping by or (like me until recently) lurking to see if they are alone, will understand that they are unequivocally *not* alone. This will be a long post...

I joined CC for one year as a mom of four littles in GA several years ago, and found the program exciting and *reassuring* - I mean, that is the heart of CC's practicum messaging (marketing), right?? You know and feel led to homeschool, but you want to ensure your kids are fully equipped. To top it all off, the demonstrations they have the kids of all ages put on in terms of memory work or discussions - wow! Who, as a young mom, doesn't long for the show-off piece of impressive memory work to put to bed any doubts friends and family have related to your choice to homeschool... who, as a young mom, doesn't hope their teens will have years of socratic discussions... who, as a young, Christian mom, doesn't hope their children will grow to know God and make Him known? Thousands of dollars in applications, tuitions, and all the curriculum pieces I could get my hands on, this first year was a total dud outside of my kids memorizing the timeline. But the impressive aspect of it falls short the first time anyone asks the kids what any of it means and they just stare blankly. The only positive that came out of it were a few friendships. When I inquired to moms in the CC group as to the program and my experience, I was told that many first year moms feel that way and just "trust the system." Fast forward a few years - we had moved across the country, tried a small Christian school and had kids who longed for the flexibility to pursue their interests and be at their own speed for learning. I brought all my kids back home for educating three years ago, and immediately plugged into a local CC community. We met some nice families, made some friends. However, I was older, hopefully wiser, and less unsure of myself as a homeschooler. I had homeschooled for two years without CC and my kids had gone into the private school far ahead of their peers in every regard and I knew that I was capable of educating my own children.

Immediately, year one of the new community in WA - alarm bells rang. The chaotic nature of the community day. The lack of any control in the classes in Foundations (and this was across four different F classes, and four different F tutors - only *one* tutor kept her classroom in line, by which I mean kids not crawling on the floors, throwing chairs, crying for snacks, talking back, etc.) coupled with how little anyone cared that this behavior was taking place was a bit alarming. But the kids did manage to make some friends, so we stuck it out. The second year, in addition to the alarm bells ringing, red flags shot up - I realized (and perhaps this is my own sheer stupidity, or simply wanting to believe the marketing) with a BANG that my kids were gleaning *nothing* on community day. Let me repeat that - NOTHING. They had some fun, but never knew what they had learned or had anything to say other than what so-and-so said to the tutor, or how this other child had sat in the corner and refused to even acknowledge their tutor. Every single thing they were learning and memorizing and understanding was happening at home - with me, their teacher (as CC is very pointed in delineating). Further, it became excessively obvious that big gaps were forming in their knowledge as I had bought fully into the "stick in the sand" and "just trust the process" mantras. We read books related to memory work, did art projects related to memory work, watched documentaries related to memory work... I am here to tell you it is not enough. Again - it is NOT enough. Believe what you will about standardized testing (and I do not think, by any means, that it is exhaustive in measuring kids' knowledge), but from the last year in private school to the end of year one in CC, my kids dropped from being ahead to on-par or lower than grade average. At the end of year two - lower than grade average in every subject.

Our third year of CC, we had established friends, and the kids enjoyed before-class play time, lunch and recess, and after Essentials/Challenge play time. That's it. They dreaded sitting in class for three+ hours, memorizing things out of context, and dealing with rowdy kids that the tutors are completely unequipped to handle or manage. We still did the memory work throughout the week, but added in robust pieces of various curriculum alongside it and continued our read-alouds and family discussions, field trips, traveling, and documentaries. Their standardized test scores shot up tremendously to mostly far above grade level. Again, I realize standardized tests may be a sore spot for many homeschoolers, but I'm simply sharing my experience. To me it was but one of a series of markers that affirmed what I was seeing first-hand.

We were already on the fence about re-joining following my oldest's ChA experience this most recent school year. Please understand that *everything* they tell you about trusting the system and waiting to reap those rewards of Challenge years was completely hollow for us. My oldest's class had kids who largely came unprepared or were uninterested in speaking up - zero "conversations" had. However, it is wildly hard to pull yourself out of a community where friends are... where your kids look forward to playing. It is just so difficult. Ultimately, when our F/E and Ch directors let us know what they would be offering for fall (video + zoom for F/E, and meeting in-person for Ch despite clear, state-wide guidance that this was not recommended), we let them know that they could consider our application money a donation, but we would not be joining this year.

The ChB director (who functions as SR in our area as well) clapped back that there would be no refunds as it states so on the application form itself, and further, we would owe her additional money because Ch directors must pay, out of the tuition they receive, even more funds to corporate. After going back and forth about this with her, she told us she believed we were trying to keep and use copyrighted materials because she had already given us the ChB guide. Sigh. We happily sent the guide back to her and will never send another dime her way. However, it did cause me to reach out to the AR for this region to follow up and ask some pointed questions. My questions ranged from the actual, corporate-level definition of what a director and tutor role is to be, what qualifications someone needs to function as an SR, and whether the application issue was true. My family is blessed that eating the application fees was not a big deal - but many families are not in the same boat. It became a matter of principle for us to get to the bottom of this.

Among many telling statements and clarifications, the AR made it explicitly clear that directors' and tutors' main function is to SEEE the parents (an acronym that stands for Support, Encourage, Equip, Empower), and help them to be classical teachers for their kids. The tutors have almost no training (a couple of half-days, slightly more for Ch level), are often first-year homeschool moms themselves (how exactly will they be helping when they have no experience or knowledge themselves??), and are completely unequipped to even handle classroom disruptions - and in fact, are encouraged not to get the parents of the child if they are a tutor, because that discourages tutors! How on earth are these same tutors/directors supposed to equip anyone? This is the blind leading the blind. Another note was that I was told CC does not dispose of any tutors or directors - she clarified that they do not fire anyone, things are simply "worked through." So if you find that there is a person who should absolutely not be in any type of authority position and take the issue to them and up the chain, guess what... literally nothing will change. Do you know why? Because it's all an elaborate MLM. Please understand that if you are looking at CC as a possibility - their curriculum appears to be largely repackaged materials from Memoria Press, Scholastic, Shurley Grammar, and more; that the leadership (directors, tutors) are mostly women with the best of intentions and hearts to help... but they are ill equipped to do so, often inexperienced themselves. A director needs nothing more than a checkbook to pay CC, a Christian worldview, and one year of homeschooling under their belt. A tutor (again, who is supposedly going to SEEE all the parents in their class) can be brand new to homeschooling, the classical model, and CC - all of the above. An SR - again, the support rep for several communities - needs nothing more than one year of homeschooling and a Biblical worldview, and a willingness to work in a commissioned structure. (MLM red flags!!!)

Further, the AR read to me verbatim from an email that had been sent from further up the chain regarding application refunds - CC is making no exceptions for anyone in any states, regardless of what state or local mandates might say/require. Specifically, they feel that with so many new homeschoolers in need of their services, those existing families who back out for any reason related to COVID rules are just taking up space for the new families who are suddenly thrust into homeschooling. When I shared my shock and disappointment at this news (many homeschool families would feel a big impact in just flushing away one, two, or three kiddos application fees) - I was told I don't understand the heart and mission of CC. I was told Leigh Bortins' largest desire is to have a ministry to "see souls saved" because of CC. This is a travesty - they are using faith as a manipulation tactic, and using "service" as a guise for business practices that appear predatory.

If you made it to the end of this looooong post, thank you for reading. People are welcome to leave comments with questions or to ask for more details. Please know that you do NOT need CC, or any particular curriculum or philosophy, to educate your children effectively and holistically in your own home. You can and will find and make friends outside of any co-op or community, so do not make the same mistake I did of feeling stuck. Do not allow yourself to feel alone because you see that the emperor is naked and everyone around you is ooh'ing and aah'ing over his "new clothes." You are right, and maybe - just maybe - if enough of us actually stand up and speak out, we will encourage others to do the same 📷

#homeschool

0 notes

velazquezfraser4-blog · 6 years

Text

Expertise That Is nice For The house And The Earth

Know-how That Is good For The house And The Earth

You may also sell it off later, for those who suppose the price is true and you are earning a superb-sufficient revenue. When you’ve discovered the fitting bank, our gross sales representatives will help you with the loan utility, free of charge. Do you have to presently have an IRA account, you can buy rare steel commodities through each conventional IRAs (which permit tax deferred transactions) and Roth IRAs (that enable tax free transactions). You will also score some additional perks with up to 3% cashback on bills you pay via the account, together with 3% in your cell phone and broadband payments, 2% on power bills and 1% on water bills. For those who pay off this loan as the contract states, you will also be doing all your credit score score ratings a favor and you may by no means have to use for dangerous credit score personal loans for those with inadequate credit score rating once more. Alternatively, whenever you at all times do not pay off your bank card monthly steadiness, make certain to examine the yearly percentage fee. However whatever the sort of bank mortgage that you want to get, you may need to guarantee which you acquire 1 that provides you the top curiosity fee and the phrases with the mortgage. A small business’s banking relationship is necessary as a result of it impacts how easily your small business runs and how a lot your banking charges and curiosity payments take away from your backside line.

The interest will likely be added to the precept stability and curiosity can be charged for that amount as effectively. To approve this mortgage quantity and provide your wants you hold to short time period mortgage limit the rules of eligibility. If you are married or buying your property together with your accomplice, the family income factor rises, and in flip so does the possible quantity you possibly can borrow. All of these things make your property extra vitality environment friendly. We joked about if we really need to save lots of cash, then we must always just stay at house and perhaps play computer video games. Before you resolve to test occurring wealth suppose about and weaknesses set up the reason you need cash or choose to be rich. If you would like to start a bank account in Indian Bank, it's best to ready and supply the above requirements given to experience a straightforward and hassle-free account application.

Put on’t produce the to begin with convention merely only one extended uninteresting lecture greater than how spectacular oneself are. Engaged on their companies just about each single day before that begin getting constant outcomes. Certainly one of the largest hassles about getting money from a bank is that they ask for what you need the money. The first step to getting your driver`s license is taking native Driving Lessons Gloucester. The actions wanted require us to step out of Facebook (related) our norm. You will seemingly be requested about your motivations in in search of out this job, and your expertise in other areas of customer support as well as banking products. Does that mean it is mistaken to have separate banking accounts? This type of banking helps infinite folks for instance, people which might be disabled and don't drive, or those that wouldn't have a car and rely upon the town bus system to get from one place to a different.

MoneyGram autoplay=1" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen title="what bank is open on sunday">

youtube

There’s been a 15-20% boost in the main city values in Jan-Dec The brand new 12 months period as compared to the earlier years. You've gotten been relationship your accomplice for the past few years and now it appears just like the time to settle down. The hearing is critical to the overview process because it is the one time that a Claimant has the opportunity to see, and discuss to, the choice maker. However the large opportunity now, and Hassane talked about it earlier, is the optimization of the manufacturing footprint. In the event you likelihood upon webpage special provides of some firms, you could acquire of the promotional worth and still use a coupon for optimum savings. Bank repossessed vehicles are definitely an option to consider earlier than you enterprise out to purchase both a brand new or a used automotive; some really good-wanting and properly-functioning vehicles might be in your possession at an inexpensive value.

Bank of India (Singapore) Savings Account rates are proven to your information about monetary investments in Singapore. You can get limitless reimbursement on ATM fees if you have a rewards checking account through this bank. The failure of a bank may not result in misplaced cash, however there are other things its shoppers need to know and anticipate. Those shareholders will not be necessarily clients of the bank so there shall be competing pursuits between clients and shareholders of a bank. In addition to income declaration, some lenders could require copies of bank statements as a form of earnings verification, in order to evaluate your eligibility for a low doc loan. But that constraint on these low finish markets are placing constraint on our product traces, which makes it more favorable for us. VVIP preview quickly. Register your curiosity now to get pleasure from earlybird low cost and alternative of choice fashions.

Payday loans are brief-time period loans.

Get the info and questions you must ask. Surgery In case you need surgery or a medical procedure, choosing an auspicious date is of paramount significance. Places similar to Bansdroni Path at 15 mls from space coronary heart near Surya sen city you live stop shall be seeing recent residential property in Kolkata. Any type of great payday lenders direct firm would validate the knowledge despatched out in by means of mortgage utility. Payday loans are quick-time period loans. You are assigned a cash drawer and maintain intakes of cash, checks and deposit slips. Are you able to please recommend which one is healthier between NRE mounted and recurring deposit ? Take recommendation from an experienced monetary adviser who can counsel you with investment choices that are effectively aligned together with your future plans and the seed capital that you are prepared to speculate. Another, if I can. One small disadvantage of this company is its conventional nature. Many individuals maintain a huge steadiness in savings accounts in banks. Larger banks make use of many various ranges of every of these 5 positions, in line with the responsibility of the position.

0 notes

etensinhor · 7 years

Text

Paragraphs on Conceptual Art

By Sol Lewitt

Conceptual art is not necessarily logical. The logic of a piece or series of pieces is a device that is used at times, only to be ruined. Logic may be used to camouflage the real intent of the artist, to lull the viewer into the belief that he understands the work, or to infer a paradoxical situation (such as logic vs. illogic). Some ideas are logical in conception and illogical perceptually. The ideas need not be complex. Most ideas that are successful are ludicrously simple. Successful ideas generally have the appearance of simplicity because they seem inevitable. In terms of ideas the artist is free even to surprise himself. Ideas are discovered by intuition. What the work of art looks like isn’t too important. It has to look like something if it has physical form. No matter what form it may finally have it must begin with an idea. It is the process of conception and realization with which the artist is concerned. Once given physical reality by the artist the work is open to the perception of al, including the artist. (I use the word perception to mean the apprehension of the sense data, the objective understanding of the idea, and simultaneously a subjective interpretation of both). The work of art can be perceived only after it is completed.

Art that is meant for the sensation of the eye primarily would be called perceptual rather than conceptual. This would include most optical, kinetic, light, and color art.

Three-dimensional art of any kind is a physical fact. The physicality is its most obvious and expressive content. Conceptual art is made to engage the mind of the viewer rather than his eye or emotions. The physicality of a three-dimensional object then becomes a contradiction to its non-emotive intent. Color, surface, texture, and shape only emphasize the physical aspects of the work. Anything that calls attention to and interests the viewer in this physicality is a deterrent to our understanding of the idea and is used as an expressive device. The conceptual artist would want o ameliorate this emphasis on materiality as much as possible or to use it in a paradoxical way (to convert it into an idea). This kind of art, then, should be stated with the greatest economy of means. Any idea that is better stated in two dimensions should not be in three dimensions. Ideas may also be stated with numbers, photographs, or words or any way the artist chooses, the form being unimportant.

0 notes