RE: Formula for premortem artistic...

Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

From: John Campbell (tojohn@texas.net)
Date: 02/25/02-04:39:54 PM Z


Greetings, Bill, et al-

Thanks for this post, Bill. It brings to mind for me that aesthetics is
more the realm of philosophers than artists or critics-and that all
(philosophers, artists, and critics) are blessed and cursed by subjective
persuasions-the idea of the taco bell collage vs.the odiferous effects on
others, for example!

And I absolutely concur with your perspective on "accident or
stream-of-consciousness" effects in creative endeavors. In my numerous
vocations I rely on the spontaneous emergence of something extraordinary in
the midst of (in spite of?) all my detailed preparations and calculations.
In fact, I would go so far as to say that my best images (in my eyes and in
the eyes of those who offer comments) are those that presented themselves
spontaneously in the midst of my working diligently toward something else
entirely.

It's a mystical experience-and I suspect it's what keeps me showing up, even
though I may have no idea why I'm really there.

Thanks, also, for your premortem formula-I've hung it on the wall.

Hasta,
John
www.photogecko.com

.

-----Original Message-----
From: William Marsh [mailto:redcloud54@earthlink.net]
Sent: Monday, February 25, 2002 2:38 PM
To: alt-photo-process-l@skyway.usask.ca
Subject: Re: Formula for premortem artistic...

Maybe I should let my comments just die away, but ...

I was feeling a bit caustic when I wrote that cynical little note.
Sometimes I can't help thinking of the guy I shared a studio with, whose
work consisted of eating lunch at Taco Bell everyday and incorporating
the leftovers (especially unused taco sauce) into a gigantic "print" he
built for weeks. After awhile it began to stink so bad that other
studios on the same hall began to complain.

So, was he telling his life story in a culinary amalgam, or merely
taking advantage the tendency of people to respond to the outrageous?
Some really wonderful things can happen by accident or
stream-of-consciousness. Everyone's stream-of-consciousness being
unique, who am I to summarily dismiss a hammer blow to the wall of
conventional wisdow? Isn't Art (note capital "A") supposed to dig
around in uncharted or, at least, unfamiliar ground?

I do know that at the end of the program (fifteen years ago - things may
have changed), he got the same important-looking sheet of MFA paper that
I, and others, did. Some people were really pissed about that, due to
what they saw as a vast difference in the amount of energy expended for
the same result. But perhaps he was simply able to express his ideas in
a less strenuous way.

I go back and forth about this all the time, judging my own work rather
harshly most of the time. How many of us have taken a picture, felt
satisfied, put the camera away, ready to move on, then taken one last
look at the scene only to see that we have missed the REAL picture by a
mile, and have to set up again and take the better photograph. This
sort of work ethic, rigorously pursuing the best image possible, seems
important to the integrity of the art, for me anyway.

Everybody who contributes to this forum is, by necessity, a "detail"
person. Not everyone goes about producing their art that way.

Bill


Date view Thread view Subject view Author view

This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : 03/08/02-09:45:22 AM Z CST