[Subgenius]

If crack cocaine and whippets and amyl nitrate are logic, then yes.

[BlackOp]

There is no logic in a personal cathartic purge...the unconscious is unique like that. The ones who give up trying to control it...are the ones who make quality work. It's usually instinctual..

I always look at art and think "what did the artist "give up" in order to make this...meaning submitting to the unconscious..and harnessing that flow. It's why you have days where you are "tapped in"..and shit just comes out..and others..there is resistance. ..i think the logical call this "inspiration".

Kubrick had a great quote...which sort of "speaks the language"..When asked what "the hardest part of making film" was..he said..."getting out of the car". He was referencing breaking through that unconscious block....and trying to harness flow. It comes and goes..frustrating and fleeting.

Tom Waits also references it when he says "we all have days..where we cant hit for shit"...same sentiment.

Bukowski.."war all the time'.......repeating theme in those who create for a living.

[Distance]

Originally Posted by BlackOp To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

There is no logic in a personal cathartic purge...the unconscious is unique like that. The ones who give up trying to control it...are the ones who make quality work. It's usually instinctual.. I always look at art and think "what did the artist "give up" in order to make this...meaning submitting to the unconscious..and harnessing that flow. It's why you have days where you are "tapped in"..and shit just comes out..and others..there is resistance. ..i think the logical call this "inspiration". Kubrick had a great quote...which sort of "speaks the language"..When asked what "the hardest part of making film" was..he said..."getting out of the car". He was referencing breaking through that unconscious block....and trying to harness flow. It comes and goes..frustrating and fleeting. Tom Waits also references it when he says "we all have days..where we cant hit for shit"...same sentiment. Bukowski.."war all the time'.......repeating theme in those who create for a living.

While I somewhat agree with you, my hackles rise over the assumption that one man's preference is what another would and should deem to be 'good' art.

Art is the resonance between the perceiver and the piece, regardless if it's coldly calculated construction, intuitive disgorgement or penciled outlines.

To add insult to injury, I find Monet's art insipid. There, I said it, regardless if it was his intuitive vomit, regardless if he's perceived as a master. Master of boring, from my perspective.

Frank Miller's art vibes strongly with me. This isn't to say that Miller's a great artist in any classical or connoisseur perceived sense but he's definitively an artist in his own way and what he produced is art.

[BlackOp]

Originally Posted by Distance To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

While I somewhat agree with you, my hackles rise over the assumption that one man's preference is what another would and should deem to be 'good' art. Art is the resonance between the perceiver and the piece, regardless if it's coldly calculated construction, intuitive disgorgement or penciled outlines. To add insult to injury, I find Monet's art insipid. There, I said it, regardless if it was his intuitive vomit, regardless if he's perceived as a master. Master of boring, from my perspective. Frank Miller's art vibes strongly with me. This isn't to say that Miller's a great artist in any classical or connoisseur perceived sense but he's definitively an artist in his own way and what he produced is art.

Monet sucks....its for suburban women who want a piece to match the couch.
To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
*notes the opportunity to take a swipe at the suburbs*..it just so much fun. He is the Spielberg of modern painters..Safe....master art inst for cowards.

Thats whats great about unconscious work..it sits on the wall .."naked"...for everyone to point their finger at it...trying to compartmentalize it...make it fit for THEIR consciousness. The arrogance of the observer..master work mocks them. There is a repeating theme..that the "master" is always ahead..only AFTER it has done it's job...do people recognize it. They study it it..trying to figure out how in the hell it was created..then after categorizing it and it's influence...attempt to teach it as a definite.

[davai]

Ha, disagree with you both, Monet's work is fucking alive! It's not so much the content which interests me, it's the colour and vibrancy. He's in a league above other landscaper's IMO for being able to bring stillness to life..

'Unconscious' art will always be accidental and personal, some liked some not, subjective. Consciously directed art, done to a plan, can be judged on one criteria - does it work?

[Jim Lattimer]

Art & Logic? Logic is defined as “reasoning-deduction-proof-validity- etc etc.” while art is defined as “creative skill-imagination-visual form-etc etc.”

Few true artists would ever subscribe to the “Philistinic” idea that “they access information that they have learned about what makes art successful.” Is decision making logical? In life perhaps. But in art???

Logic will surely tell the artist that snow is white, not purple, yet his artistic creativity will tell him that if he wants to paint snow purple, then why not?

When you have time, access the works of Jean-Baptiste-Siméon Chardin ... He is alleged to have been a logical painter.

[Daoist]

	Originally Posted by Jim Lattimer To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
	Art & Logic? Logic is defined as “reasoning-deduction-proof-validity- etc etc.” while art is defined as “creative skill-imagination-visual form-etc etc.”

It depends on what kind of logic you're talking about. Statistical causality (which involves anything that can be observed) works somewhat differently from this kind of logic. It's more like picking a distribution to represent a simpler version of reality, and comparing it with the real reality. The first step is very aesthetic.

Other kinds of logic also employ aesthetics in their axioms, if you look hard enough.

[BlackOp]

Originally Posted by Daoist To view links or images in this forum your post count must be 2 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.

It depends on what kind of logic you're talking about. Statistical causality (which involves anything that can be observed) works somewhat differently from this kind of logic. It's more like picking a distribution to represent a simpler version of reality, and comparing it with the real reality. The first step is very aesthetic. Other kinds of logic also employ aesthetics in their axioms, if you look hard enough.

or even simpler...what is vs. what could/might be....or contesting that what "is"...is a farce. Anyway too may constraints going on.....define away...I'd rather make things and let someone else figure it out.

[dellai]

Every single human being has been born creative or with creative capabilities, this is a true statement for almost every artist. As we're raised by our family and society we learn that we should face the logical part of our brain to become a 'successful' citizen in a 'successful' society. Thus by using thinking we should be able to have a successful life according to the definition and rules of our society. Most artist who have not learned this basic conventions or are somehow against these so called conventions feel that every human being has a reason to be and for this they believe that they - the artist - are allowed to be. This opens doors to break with conventions and to redefine words as 'successful', 'must' or other words that don't resonate to well with the artist mind. If these words become just words and not definitions of life, you could actually redefine them towards your own feelings and conventions and it might be possible that your artwork could show successful people where this life could be about and not where it 'should' be about.

Is there any logic in breaking with logic? You tell me, and I will not judge you for your definition of logic but it might that one of my artworks could reconsider one of your definitions as being a mere convention of how things are defined in our world. In the end this world is our world and only you can break with any conventions and come back to your world with new words and new feelings.

A little example: think about words like gay, bi, murder or death. These resonate well with conventions in our world and they are merely here to give you a feeling, whether you like them or not. But words like gay and bi can also be interpreted as being in love and we all have positive feelings with a word like love. Death and even murder can be the beginning of something new and thus can be redefined as such in the mind of an artist. I hope I don't sound to vague and that you can feel what I mean.

[Othesemo]

Speaking as a musician and composer... no. It may be possible to analyze or critique art using logic, but the process of creating or (in the case of music) performing it has nothing to do with logic in any conscious sense.

[deconspire]

It is not based in logic, although logic can be a part of it. And I'm weary of the silly argument over it. If you think it is, so be it, you might as well try to describe a completely new color because that's how lost you are artistically.