“They saw their injured country's woe;
The flaming town, the wasted field;
Then rushed to meet the insulting foe;
They took the spear, - but left the shield.”
―Philip Freneau
.
And by a prudent flight and cunning save A life which valour could not, from the grave. A better buckler I can soon regain, But who can get another life again?
Archilochus
The women featured in several of Vermeer's best known paintings have nearly identical faces.
Was that because he used the same model –– a wife or mistress, perhaps? –– or because of a generalized ethne-racial resemblance in coloring and facial features?
Also his interiors almost invariably appear stark, chilly and –– dare I say it? –– oddly sterile.
Also, there's a notable lack of movement and interaction among those portrayed.
I believe (if the movie, "The girl with he pearl earring" was true) that the model started out as a servant, but ended up as a lover/muse. And I suspect that the sterility of the environments he painted had much to do with Dutch cleanliness obsessions and the "techniques" which Vermeer employed to produce his art. I understand that "others" (friends of Tim Teller and Penn Gilette) have reproduced them.
I had heard of master Flemish painters using projection to capture every precise detail in the intricately ornamented brass chandeliers of the period and the like. Basically TRACING a projected image, instead of attempting to paint it it freehand
I remember reading a well-illustrated article about it. I think it may have been in the Smithsonian Magazine back when it was still a reputable publication, but I can't be sure. Anyway, the techique is all right with me. The artist featured there was not Vermeer but Rogier Vanderweyden. (I think!)
At any rate, I still insist that the farther away we move from "pure" creativity towards the use of material aides, the less original, less genuinely human the art becomes.
My field is classical Music. Having been beautifully educated from an early I learned a great deal about it. I've known, for instance, for many years that a COMPUTER may be programmed to give a far more ACCURATE rendition of classic keyboard works than even the finest virtuoso pianist , harpsichordist or organist,. Moreover the computerized "interpretation" can be played back at virtually any speed with every deail in perfect alignment.
So why should a person spend twelve or fifteen or more years six to eight hours day in intense, heavily supervised, often painfully challenging, rigorously disciplined study trying to acquire enough skill to be able actually to PLAY the pieces on his or her own?
What's the point, since machines can ow do it more accurately with little or no effort?
You must hinestly love, and be increasingly knowledgeable about what the music SIGNIFIES before you could understand why mere pinpoint accuracy is NOT the ultimate goal in concert performance. this ESSENCE of he MUSIC is NOT in the NOTES, themselves, but what a performing artist does with the space surrounding the notes.
That no true performing artist plays any piece EXACTLY like any OTHER performing artist is the primary reason those of us who love and do our best to understand the great masterworks remain fascinated with the Mozart and Beethoven symphonies –– and countless other works –– for decades pn decades. We NEVER tire of this repertory, because no one has YET fully plumbed the depths of meaning and emotional expression each contains.
Machine made music is a lot like putting PLASTIC FLOWERS in a priceless, museum quality MING DYNASTY (1300's - 1600's?) vase. Or having the Ladies of the Altar Guild put the same old fake bouquets on the altar week after week after week.
Those who cannot see the difference between REAL flowers and PLASTIC –– or even SILK –– imitations probably can't perceive any appreciable ifference been imported vintage Champagne and Thunderbird, Strawberry Hill and Riunite –– or Bartles & James Wine Coolers. Or any difference between pate de foie gras and liverwurst. (:-o
8 comments:
"[Our computerized reconstruction] is more precise, more beautiful than the original."
Oh dear! I was quite interested till I heard that.
It looks as though Kipling must have been right after all.
"East is East and West is West and never the twain shall meet."
The women featured in several of Vermeer's best known paintings have nearly identical faces.
Was that because he used the same model –– a wife or mistress, perhaps? –– or because of a generalized ethne-racial resemblance in coloring and facial features?
Also his interiors almost invariably appear stark, chilly and –– dare I say it? –– oddly sterile.
Also, there's a notable lack of movement and interaction among those portrayed.
I'm sorry, bu i have to say it:
I much prefer an Otaku to a Old Taco.
I believe (if the movie, "The girl with he pearl earring" was true) that the model started out as a servant, but ended up as a lover/muse. And I suspect that the sterility of the environments he painted had much to do with Dutch cleanliness obsessions and the "techniques" which Vermeer employed to produce his art. I understand that "others" (friends of Tim Teller and Penn Gilette) have reproduced them.
Here are some clips.
Penn and Tim's video is FASCINATING.
I had heard of master Flemish painters using projection to capture every precise detail in the intricately ornamented brass chandeliers of the period and the like. Basically TRACING a projected image, instead of attempting to paint it it freehand
I remember reading a well-illustrated article about it. I think it may have been in the Smithsonian Magazine back when it was still a reputable publication, but I can't be sure. Anyway, the techique is all right with me. The artist featured there was not Vermeer but Rogier Vanderweyden. (I think!)
At any rate, I still insist that the farther away we move from "pure" creativity towards the use of material aides, the less original, less genuinely human the art becomes.
My field is classical Music. Having been beautifully educated from an early I learned a great deal about it. I've known, for instance, for many years that a COMPUTER may be programmed to give a far more ACCURATE rendition of classic keyboard works than even the finest virtuoso pianist , harpsichordist or organist,. Moreover the computerized "interpretation" can be played back at virtually any speed with every deail in perfect alignment.
So why should a person spend twelve or fifteen or more years six to eight hours day in intense, heavily supervised, often painfully challenging, rigorously disciplined study trying to acquire enough skill to be able actually to PLAY the pieces on his or her own?
What's the point, since machines can ow do it more accurately with little or no effort?
You must hinestly love, and be increasingly knowledgeable about what the music SIGNIFIES before you could understand why mere pinpoint accuracy is NOT the ultimate goal in concert performance. this ESSENCE of he MUSIC is NOT in the NOTES, themselves, but what a performing artist does with the space surrounding the notes.
That no true performing artist plays any piece EXACTLY like any OTHER performing artist is the primary reason those of us who love and do our best to understand the great masterworks remain fascinated with the Mozart and Beethoven symphonies –– and countless other works –– for decades pn decades. We NEVER tire of this repertory, because no one has YET fully plumbed the depths of meaning and emotional expression each contains.
Machine made music is a lot like putting PLASTIC FLOWERS in a priceless, museum quality MING DYNASTY (1300's - 1600's?) vase. Or having the Ladies of the Altar Guild put the same old fake bouquets on the altar week after week after week.
Those who cannot see the difference between REAL flowers and PLASTIC –– or even SILK –– imitations probably can't perceive any appreciable ifference been imported vintage Champagne and Thunderbird, Strawberry Hill and Riunite –– or Bartles & James Wine Coolers. Or any difference between pate de foie gras and liverwurst. (:-o
It becomes "emotionless". And emotions are important to art and music generation. The emphasis and sustains placed upon the notes.
Yes!
Post a Comment