Music vs. Painting

[tds]

the duration of perceiving a work wholly, for one. anything else?

[Tash]

as an artist, i vote music as the better! well depends on whether you're talking about art created before the postmodern era or now. basically i think that art today is absolute rubbish, based on what we learn in painting at uni- it's just do what you like experiment with materials as much as possible and bugger all to technique. thus creating lazy artists who can't actually be bothered painting anything realistic and ruins the whole concept of an artist being someone who is gifted in the art of painting realistic images. it's stupid. i feel like it's not even worth doing because talent doesn't count any more in the art world. a bit harsh maybe? too bad. music (classical at least) is still generally based on talent, cos if you don't have the technique and musicality you're not going to get very far. it's just better!

[tds]

as an artist, i vote music as the better! well depends on whether you're talking about art created before the postmodern era or now. basically i think that art today is absolute rubbish, based on what we learn in painting at uni- it's just do what you like experiment with materials as much as possible and bugger all to technique. thus creating lazy artists who can't actually be bothered painting anything realistic and ruins the whole concept of an artist being someone who is gifted in the art of painting realistic images. it's stupid. i feel like it's not even worth doing because talent doesn't count any more in the art world. a bit harsh maybe? too bad. music (classical at least) is still generally based on talent, cos if you don't have the technique and musicality you're not going to get very far. it's just better!

thank you for your post. what would you say about experimental modern music? does it compare favourably with modern paintings? or they are just pretty much one gesture? tds

[allchopin]

thus creating lazy artists who can't actually be bothered painting anything realistic and ruins the whole concept of an artist being someone who is gifted in the art of painting realistic images.

I think you have a slight misperception of an artist, as one being able to create a painting that looks realistic.  This is actually not the more difficult aspect of drawing (nor the most artistic!) but it is creating something different and exciting where true artistry can emerge.  It is true, however, how absurd some artists take their experimentation... Ellsworth Kelly comes to mind for his 'minimalistic' creations (basically a dot and/or circle on a blank canvas), analogous to John Cage for the piano repertory. 
(For those of you who are still skeptical, here is an actual picture of one of Kelly's works)

[pianomann1984]

Ellsworth Kelly comes to mind for his 'minimalistic' creations

What do you think of minimalism in music?  As someone who recently took part in a performance of Steve Reich's 6 pianos I would be interested to see what you all think.

[toxico]

 

Two posters i have.  Clifford Bailey - "What you Say Now"  and Justin Bua - "Piano Man".  I'll leave it at that. 

[Tash]

I think you have a slight misperception of an artist, as one being able to create a painting that looks realistic. This is actually not the more difficult aspect of drawing (nor the most artistic!) but it is creating something different and exciting where true artistry can emerge. It is true, however, how absurd some artists take their experimentation... Ellsworth Kelly comes to mind for his 'minimalistic' creations (basically a dot and/or circle on a blank canvas), analogous to John Cage for the piano repertory.
[/img]

ok let me rephrase my thought. so yes the ability to create something in a different and exciting way, but within that i believe that the ability to draw/paint well is important. like uni etc should be there to teach you the basics so you can develop a good technique and be the basis of your artistic practice and then once you've established that you can go do whatever the hell you want. but what i'm finding in my painting course is that there's such an emphasis on experimentation that people don't bother making the effort to paint images but just throw some paint on and voila let's just ignore everything art derives from.
so that's my thoughts on what an artist should be. if you can create something interesting that is based on some kind of technical background then cheers to them they have my respect.

experimental modern music, that's fine provided they've made the effort to learn about composition in the past and the conventional terms so they actually have some kind of knowledge in the area. same as art.

minimalist music- i do like it, philip glass and steve reich are the bomb, because they know what they're doing. i think with music there's more emphasis on technique and history etc so it's less of an issue than in art. like if you decided to become a composer and had little experience in music at all then that'd just be pointless. that's what pop music is there for hahaha

[allchopin]

What do you think of minimalism in music?  As someone who recently took part in a performance of Steve Reich's 6 pianos I would be interested to see what you all think.

I am not familiar with Reich's works, but I would be interested in how he approached minimalist writing. 
I think of minimalism as a pathway to something greater, but unto itself, quite tasteless.  It is not to sit down and listen to, but rather to build upon and create a more finished product.  This is analogous to building a house:  I ask a minimalist to build me a house and I get a foundation, a wood frame, and a floor plan.  This is not nearly as good as asking Frank Lloyd Wright to build me a house, complete with lavish portico and vaulted ceilings.  Yet, they share something in common and that is the infrastructure.  Although, sometime I think this idea is missed and the minimalist house ends up being celebrated for what it is - just a frame.  Whether you call it true art or not is up to you, but I think there is just too much repertory out there to be concentrated on incomplete creations like these.

experimental modern music, that's fine provided they've made the effort to learn about composition in the past and the conventional terms so they actually have some kind of knowledge in the area. same as art.

Agreed; it is hard to know if someone really knows what they are doing if they haven't studied what others before them have done.  This is like trying to write a piece of tonal music without having studied the structure of music, how it works, and how others with experience in the field have tinkered with it (sans the little Mozart's out there )  And along these lines, artists known specifically for their abstract works, like Picasso and Dali, were respected not only because they could paint a face that doesn't resemble a human face, but because they were also able to create a realistic view of the world.  It is the artist's choice here which they prefer to create.

[jeff]

i think one important aspect of minimalist music (some more than others) is the meditative or trance-inducing aspect. in a sense, repetitive music takes you outside of time, and therefore transcends our state of existense (to get philosophical). you can find people using all sorts of other repetitive actions for the same effect.

[Regulus Medtner]

Mystras by Stavros Kantzikis.

I find this painting almost musical.

[tds]

Mystras by Stavros Kantzikis.

I find this painting almost musical.

just like other impressionistic paintings, the light/shade affect in this one speaks to the bone. i find light/shade affect the most important element in painting/drawing. it is exactly like rhythm in music. thank you for posting this wonderful painting. best, tds

ps. i venture to say that the tower on the top left could have been blurred and darkened a little, as i think the focus is on and around the lower half of the painting. what do you all think?

[m1469]

Well, okay.  I have never taken an art appreciation class and have a long way to go in this area to feel comfortable critiquing, but I decided to use this as an opportunity to grow in this area.

So, tds, I wonder if you would explain what you mean a little more for me ?  What do you mean the light/shade affect speaks to the bone ?

i find light/shade affect the most important element in painting/drawing.

I think I agree with this, including the use of negative or absent space, which is a big thing to me and one of my favorites to think about (just like using rests in music, another very huge favorite).

Is this along the lines of what you mean by this (?) :

it is exactly like rhythm in music.

So, I find the tower having light in it's triangle roof to be curious to me.  I wonder if it is a sunbeam that is touching only there and the side of the building just to the left (as sunbeams are at times quite selective about their light) ?  It is a contrast to the sky behind, and ties in and balances out the brightness in other portions of the work.  Also, as there is not any negative space in this piece, I find the light on that tower to offer me a similar feeling to negative space.


m1469

[m1469]

actually, I suspect I am not thinking correctly about what exactly is considered "negative space" officially.  Most the time I think of it as actually untouched, or virtually anyway.  But, maybe it has to do with shading/color contrast also ?  Would the sky seen through the arch be considered as such ?

m1469

[Regulus Medtner]

It is indeed exquisite, I particularly like the lighting effects and how closely they emulate the actual Greek landscape and Mediterranean lighting conditions. I’ve been to this place, Mystras was the medieval - Byzantine capital of Peloponnese, very near the ancient and modern-day Sparta.


The area that looks subdued compared with the other portions of the painting is most probably under cloudshade (you can see clouds in the sky and the sun probably lights from an angle somewhere behind the beholder’s back), not included the small upper left portion with the highlighted dome of the bell-tower, which lies outside the cloudshade. This is a very realistic effect, since the sun really does create such a blinding reflective effect on objects and buildings, and you can feel it extends beyond the actual borders of the painting.

[tds]

What do you mean the light/shade affect speaks to the bone ?

lol. to speak to the bone is prolly just a funny idiom of mine. ok, something that speaks to my bone(lol) has to be 1) organic 2) of the essence

btw, notice how the window of the tower located on the top left of the painting was brought into such focus. if our eyes indeed focus on this window as clearly as it was painted, then all the closer subjects will be very blurry. i believe this very window is not the main focus of this painting.

also, it coulda been painted a hair darker due to the distance.

i might be wrong but that's how my mind wants to believe. best, tds