[Leica] Some more 'cutting the edge'

[phamard at numericable.fr (phamard@numericable.fr)]

Repeat : Warning! Only for the really interested :-)

Op 8-dec-07, om 18:25 heeft phamard@numericable.fr het volgende  
>geschreven:
>
>Warning! Only for the really interested :-)
>
>> What matters is what you get, what you feel.
>For the sender of the receiver? Or for both?
>

Les deux mon g?n?ral - both and either, neether and nayther as you wish 
(wink) so long as a party gets some feeling and is not left unmoved.


>Might this not be the difference between art and succesful art?

NOPE!
works with adverts, sports shots, charity xmas postcards and else. Nothing 
to to with art. Got to do with life and feelings (sigh)


>If successful is the right word. Accepted might be a better one.

Success: how do you measure success? what's the scale? 
I haven't got any so far. (no morals inside)
Bl?/bucks/quids? Prestige, ego, woolfish ladies/men at your door (well, 
erm), else? 

>
>For a long time, art was described like this: A=Ex^?i/Em^?i
>Where A: art, i: individual, Ex: expression, Em: emotion
>Thus: art is the most individual expression of the most individual  
>emotion.
>
>A very pure thought. A sender's definition. 19 centuries of art.
>But in these mediatized days, and apart from commerce, the receiver  
>has become equally important.

NO!
it always was, from the Prince who accepted Bach's works to the King who 
forced writers to exile. 
And I'm not sure that the artist is necessarily after getting approval by 
the public. Or even by the sponsors, whoever they are (supra).

>And this means factoring in a whole lot of other parameters.
>It might be interesting to start charting these parameters and see if  
>we can bring this any further.
>All individual feelings averaged will probably be one of them. (F^ 
>(median of)?i)
>
>;-)
>
>This is fun.
>Among some very good personal friends, we have a since art school  
>recurring theme called 'Define art'.
>It doesn't happen often, but every time that we do, it becomes one of  
>those moments we talk about for years.

Never been to art school Philippe - regrets in the voice - never been to a 
technical school either - regrets in his voice - never done or produced 
anything worth publishing.
Who cares? Not me, in the first place LoL.

I love murmur, Alice as seen after Tenniel, and so much more that has been 
shown here. Don't ask me why.

But this thread is the most enthralling pleasure I've had since being on the 
LUG.
Thanks for starting it, and for fuelling it with some much insight.

Amiti?s
Another Philippe 

>Philippe :-)
>
>_______________________________________________
>Leica Users Group.
>See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>


----Message d'origine----
>De: Philippe Orlent <philippe.orlent@pandora.be>
>Sujet: Re: [Leica] Some more 'cutting the edge'
>Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2007 19:18:35 +0100
>A: Leica Users Group <lug@leica-users.org>
>
>Op 8-dec-07, om 18:25 heeft phamard@numericable.fr het volgende  
>geschreven:
>
>Warning! Only for the really interested :-)
>
>> What matters is what you get, what you feel.
>
>
>For the sender of the receiver? Or for both?
>
>Might this not be the difference between art and succesful art?
>If successful is the right word. Accepted might be a better one.
>
>For a long time, art was described like this: A=Ex^?i/Em^?i
>Where A: art, i: individual, Ex: expression, Em: emotion
>Thus: art is the most individual expression of the most individual  
>emotion.
>
>A very pure thought. A sender's definition. 19 centuries of art.
>But in these mediatized days, and apart from commerce, the receiver  
>has become equally important.
>And this means factoring in a whole lot of other parameters.
>It might be interesting to start charting these parameters and see if  
>we can bring this any further.
>All individual feelings averaged will probably be one of them. (F^ 
>(median of)?i)
>
>;-)
>
>This is fun.
>Among some very good personal friends, we have a since art school  
>recurring theme called 'Define art'.
>It doesn't happen often, but every time that we do, it becomes one of  
>those moments we talk about for years.
>
>Philippe :-)
>
>_______________________________________________
>Leica Users Group.
>See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>

-------------------------------------------------------------
Noos, votre bureau virtuel sur Internet : Mail...
Web : webmail.noos.fr