[Baren]: The mailing list / discussion forum for woodblock printmaking.

Baren Digest              Tuesday, 13 October 1998      Volume 05 : Number 311

----------------------------------------------------------------------

From: Bill Ritchie <ritchie@emeralda.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 06:51:25 -0700
Subject: [Baren 1863] Re: inferior artists? 

Daniel wrote:
>So I'll add this idea for zest : The best prints are not made by
>printmakers at all.

In my work and in reading the Baren and Prints Lists, I've been inclined to
sit back and watch as people merge to arm wrestle the old "who's better at
art than who".

Marquis ought to publish something in their "Who's Who" like "Who's better
than Who?" (That may be grammatikally incorrect.)

I want to relate a story.

Thirty-thousand years ago, a woman fell to earth from the Flower Planet.
she found women secretly painting in a cave you could reach only by an
underwater passage. It was on the coast of what we call France, near
today's Cosquer.

The women accepted her, though she was of a dark skin color and she had
weird ways. One was that instead of painting, drawing and otherwise making
marks, she simply stamped her handprint, or spattered pigmen around it.

The oldest and wisest among the women knew that this would lead to trouble,
but once they had seen how to use a template and, at the same, time make a
mark that was distinctly a part of them, the cat was out of the bag. Or,
put it another way, the handwriting was on the wall.

Ever since then, there has been a debate whenever painting and printmaking
people have come together speaking a natural language such as English. It
always seems to come down to judgements. 

It's not tiresome, although I personally feel it's regressive but I don't
want to spoil the fun by putting on the Judge's robe.

To summarize, in my opinion painting, drawing, and sculpting one-of-a-kind
moments in art have little or nothing to do with printmaking. The former is
a different kind of activity than the latter, with different intentions.

The intentions of the former are sometimes characterized by debates like
the one Daniel, Angela and I are participating in. The latter tends to rise
above these debates (or beside or below) on a different tack.

The navigator (note the sailing metaphor in the previous sentence) is my
model printmaker, for he or she relies on extrinsic realities--the moon and
stars, the moving target, relativity and other people--to capture the dream
and reach a goal.

Once the journey is begun--the plate started--whether by oneself or with
other people or machines, the printmaker never ceases striving for another
adventure. Popes and princes, federal subsidy, institutions of every kind,
may capture the painter, drafts person or architect who offers a
one-of-a-kind experience and relationship, adding to their own power.

Power of this kind needs to have in its armaments the conferring of
ascendant values--something akin to a gold standard in order to maintain
power structures that we can depend on.

Whenever a printmaker finds him or her self feeling confused by the debate
and needing a little building-up, they need only remember the Printmaker's
Mantra: Without exactly replicable images, there would be no art, craft and
design. We're co-dependent, all of us humans, on these arts of painting,
drawing, sculpting and printmaking.

Though fundamentally unalike, they are at least complementary.

- - Bill
<http://www.emeralda.com>

------------------------------

From: Graham Scholes <gscholes@islandnet.com>
Date: Mon, 12 Oct 1998 10:15:28 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Baren 1864] Re: inferior artists? 

Bill  Ritchie wrote....
>I want to relate a story.

Your little story and posting hits the nail on the Head.

I have been listening (read) in on the discussion, thinking (don't say it
Ray)..... interesting but.......
Making marks in any way will always be debated, however Bill your posting
is profound.
You have just joined the ranks with Ray Esposito another profound guy.

All this talk about the technical workings getting in the way and
influencing the artist does not fit everybody all of the time ...just some
of the bods some of the time. Generalization in the arts is tricky thingie,
because you can always find exception to the rule.

Rules in Art are there to be broken.

Graham

All those who believe in psychokinesis raise my hand.

------------------------------

From: Daniel Kelly <daniel@vowel.or.jp>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 08:56:40 +0000
Subject: [Baren 1865] Re: inferior artists? 

Bill Ritchie your words are spoken like a true humanist and are fit for
the age we live in. Thank you. The debate of "who's bigger" will never
stop. Nor will which way , or how to ,or even which direction we should
go in. But the debate itself is what makes us human after all. To
communicate and play with our reasoning is part of the social animal.

Thank you.

And Graham, well  your posting is as you say a tricky thingie. We are
indeed all different Graham. Its just that the technical side and the
influences of the artist is really part of what  this discussion group
is about. Some of us some of the time think about how to create the
better artist in ourselves.
This leads me to think we might as well go back to work. The real value
is in there.

Rub on
D.

------------------------------

From: Graham Scholes <gscholes@islandnet.com>
Date: Tue, 13 Oct 1998 01:57:09 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [Baren 1866] Re: inferior artists? 

Daniel wrote....
>This leads me to think we might as well go back to work.
> The real value is in there.

Now you are on the right track.

Graham

------------------------------

End of Baren Digest V5 #311
***************************