Searching for extera tersesial inteligence

[Jim Richards]

This is Radiotabs, broadcasting to you from our Vogon Constructor Vessel, err...trailerpark compound...

[tabs]

Originally Posted by Jim Richards

This is Radiotabs, broadcasting to you from our Vogon Constructor Vessel, err...trailerpark compound...

WHERE DID YOU GET THAT PICTURE FROM....MOTHER did she give it to you....that is how I appear on my home planet.

[tabs]

Originally Posted by DARISC

I'm a bit old fashioned. Mother taught me that people's judgment of the quality of what one says may be colored by the care one takes when saying it.

However if you have talent there is quality in spontaneity...just take a look at Van Gogh or Picasso's work. So it ain't necessarily so that quality is reflected by the "care" one gives in the presentation of line. It is the idea and imagination behind it.

[m21sniper]

Originally Posted by jyl

Could be, but with 10^21 stars in the universe, its only a one in a 10,000 million million million chance they happen by our neck of the woods . . .

We could be situated on the periphery of a major interstellar trade route, we don't know. We're ignant.

Aliens may stop on Earth to take a dump all the time.

[slakjaw]

Originally Posted by m21sniper

Aliens may stop on Earth to take a dump all the time.

its too expensive to **** here. There was another post about how much it actually costs to crap in CA.

[DARISC]

Originally Posted by tabs

However if you have talent there is quality in spontaneity...just take a look at Van Gogh or Picasso's work. So it ain't necessarily so that quality is reflected by the "care" one gives in the presentation of line. It is the idea and imagination behind it.

Ooooh my! I do believe that you may be mixing together impatience/lack of attention to detail with adroitness/spontaneity!

While both of those painters worked with great alacrity (Van Gogh sometimes at a fevered pitch, by historical accounts) NONE of their work exhibits even a hint of uncertainty or carelessness, though roughness and apparent speed of execution might lead an uninformed viewer to think that it does.

Their genius lies partially in the fact that they could express themselves with such clarity and power, often, especially in the case of Picasso, with an extraordinary economy of means.

Show me litererary examples written by acclaimed writers that you compare to off-handed first drafts such as we post here and I'll be open to enlightenment.

Incidentally (not authoritatively), I know a little bit about that of which I speak, being a painter myself. And, brer Tabs, I'd never consider comparing my posts (which are also ALL first drafts) using examples of geniuses as an analogy!

[RWebb]

Originally Posted by exc911ence

If Star Trek has taught me anything, it's that alien chicks are horny and like to make it with Earth dudes... I think it was Shatner's Third Law. I say, bring 'em on!

Nominee for best post on this thread.

[tabs]

Originally Posted by DARISC

Ooooh my! I do believe that you may be mixing together impatience/lack of attention to detail with adroitness/spontaneity!

While both of those painters worked with great alacrity (Van Gogh sometimes at a fevered pitch, by historical accounts) NONE of their work exhibits even a hint of uncertainty or carelessness, though roughness and apparent speed of execution might lead an uninformed viewer to think that it does.

Their genius lies partially in the fact that they could express themselves with such clarity and power, often, especially in the case of Picasso, with an extraordinary economy of means.

Show me litererary examples written by acclaimed writers that you compare to off-handed first drafts such as we post here and I'll be open to enlightenment.

Incidentally (not authoritatively), I know a little bit about that of which I speak, being a painter myself. And, brer Tabs, I'd never consider comparing my posts (which are also ALL first drafts) using examples of geniuses as an analogy!

I have seen Van Gogh's work up close and he did have a frenetic style that seemed that he wanted to get it on canvas before he lost the vision of what he wanted to accomplish.

I don't care about a perfectly concise presentation, what I care about is the presentation of complex or abstract ideas in a coherent fashion. It is the idea that makes or brakes and not the sloppiness of the presentation.

There is a cetain superficiality to those that get hung up on the cleanness of presentation. In other words one has to look beyond the presentation and onto the idea that is expressed. The words are important and not whether they are spelled correctly.

[Jim Richards]

Originally Posted by tabs

The words are important and not whether they are spelled correctly.

Klaatu barada niktu (sp)

[scottmandue]

Originally Posted by slakjaw

its too expensive to **** here. There was another post about how much it actually costs to crap in CA.

Oh doo tell!

With recent pay cuts I'm looking to make some money with a side job.

[DARISC]

Originally Posted by tabs

I have seen Van Gogh's work up close and he did have a frenetic style that seemed that he wanted to get it on canvas before he lost the vision of what he wanted to accomplish.

I've also seen, a lot, of Van Gogh's work up close; in NYC, LA, The Van Gogh Museum in Amsterdam and a number of other places in Europe. While some of Van Gogh’s work is described as appearing frenzied by some, he painted with intense deliberateness which was definitely not uncontrolled (and certainly not sloppy). Nor were his visions fleeting, which is evident when looking at the body of his work, which is clearly not the manifestation of fleeting visions, but rather the evolution of a singular vision that is unique to the artist and defines his genius.

I don't care about a perfectly concise presentation, what I care about is the presentation of complex or abstract ideas in a coherent fashion. It is the idea that makes or brakes and not the sloppiness of the presentation.

Whether you care about it or not, concision is important when trying to present complex or abstract ideas coherently. Whether the idea “makes or breaks” is only obfuscated by sloppiness in its presentation.

There is a cetain superficiality to those that get hung up on the cleanness of presentation. In other words one has to look beyond the presentation and onto the idea that is expressed. The words are important and not whether they are spelled correctly.

There is a certain superficiality to those that get hung up affectation when making a presentation. In other words, if one has to look beyond a sloppy presentation to get to the idea that is expressed, the writer might be found to have sloppily formed ideas as well. The words are important (well, yeah!) and correct spelling is, uh…..nice?

..

[tabs]

One can be frentic in style and still have control. Van Gogh worked very quickly to capture the essence of what he wanted to convey. Sometimes he would do 2 or 3 pictures a day, working quickly before the light failed. Van Gogh developed a unique style or way of painting that you call "singular vision" yet that has nothing to do with a paticular idea or image that he wanted to capture. Style remains a constant and a paticular composition or idea is singular and unique.Sometimes it needs to be captured quickly beofre it fades. There is a vast difference between the two.

[DARISC]

Originally Posted by tabs

One can be frentic in style and still have control. Van Gogh worked very quickly to capture the essence of what he wanted to convey. Sometimes he would do 2 or 3 pictures a day, working quickly before the light failed.

Yes, he often did. Portraits and other exceptions, e.g. "The Potato Eaters", had little to do with failing light as they were not completed, as so many of his works were, in a single session.

Van Gogh developed a unique style or way of painting that you call "singular vision" yet that has nothing to do with a paticular idea or image that he wanted to capture.

Yes, personal or unique would have been better choices than singular.

Style remains a constant and a paticular composition or idea is singular and unique.

Style most often evolves over time, as did Van Gogh's. And of course each of his paintings are unique. One could refer to another's painting as "in the style of an early Van Gogh" or "in the style of Picasso's Blue Period", no?

Sometimes it needs to be captured quickly beofre it fades.

"It" being the image? Yes, when fading light is the issue. But it seems apparent that he spent more time on portraits and other works than he perhaps did on "Starry Night". et al. But then, we really don't know: he was an incredibly tormented and facile painter. That he was often frenziedly caught up in the moment when he painted is true - often, but not necessarily always.

There is a vast difference between the two.

The difference between the use of the word "singular" and "style" in the context I used it strikes me as the basis for a semantics discussion. I tried to clarify, above, what I meant to say.

..

[tabs]

A persons handwriting or brush strokes remain constant an idea or image sometimes needs to be put down quickly or it may get lost.

[DARISC]

Originally Posted by tabs

A persons handwriting or brush strokes remain constant an idea or image sometimes needs to be put down quickly or it may get lost.

4 paintings by 2 artists at different stages of their development. Constancy of brushstrokes are hardly definitive of their commonality. Perhaps a forensics lab...

Are you a painter?

[m21sniper]

Tabs' nuclear missile shuttin' off Aliens on Larry King live:

[tabs]

I don't paint but have a couple of pieces hanging around. I know the art conservator that does Butterfields, Morans, Abels, Sotherbys and most of the big Gallerys in LA's work. He never even looks at signatures and can tell an artists work by brush stroke.
Your brush stroke, composition and colour pallet are indivdual things..