 The Art of War... |
 Blog For Free! Archives Home 2007 May 2006 October 2006 July 2006 June 2006 May 2006 April 2005 November 2005 October 2005 September 2005 August 2005 July 2005 June 2005 May 2005 April 2005 March 2005 February 2005 January 2004 November 2004 October 2004 September 2004 August 2004 July 2004 June 2004 May 2004 April 2004 March 2004 February My Links Filbert The Jongleur tBlog My Profile Send tMail My tFriends My Images Sponsored Blog  
|
posted by: BerlinBear (reply) post date: 06.20.05 (8:42 am) Oooh, I love a good outraged letter to the editor. You go girl. posted by: juniperflux (reply) post date: 06.20.05 (8:52 am) Reply to: BerlinBear Thanks. Clearly, it doesn't take much to get me wound up. j posted by: lindy (reply) post date: 06.20.05 (9:12 am) Good grief. That really was a pathetic article. I think Ruscha was more of an idiot than Solomon was. And I'm not sure I dig his art. I'll have to investigate that further. There's no denying that there is speed and wind blowing through your hair when you look at pieces from 'Jack the dripper'??? Ummmm. Okay. By the way, you don't need a passcode to follow your link. It took me straight there. This letter is well deserved and I hope it is well received. posted by: juniperflux (reply) post date: 06.20.05 (9:47 am) Reply to: lindy The few online images of his pieces pale in comparison to the originals, which are really quite stunning and on huge canvases boasting all sorts of unusual techniques and media. Admittedly, however, it's not for everyone. That said... wasn't the article awful????? As disappointed as I was in Ruscha for sounding like an aging surfer desperately trying to look hip, I was even more disappointed in the "journalist" and then, of course, the editor who contributed to the publication of such drivel. (*giggle* "Jack the dripper"... to be honest, that description of Jackson Pollack might be the only thing I *did* like from article). Anyway, I'd be thrilled if they chose to print the letter, but I'm not holding my breath. For a few days now I've been holding in some steam in regards to the article, and I already feel as though it's been released just by getting my thoughts down on paper, so really, while having it published would be nice, at this point, it's somewhat superfluous. As always, thanks for your thoughts. j posted by: lindy (reply) post date: 06.20.05 (10:26 am) Reply to: juniperflux 'Aging surfer boy trying to look hip.' haha. Yes, exactly. He really came off a bit of a chump. I'm inclined not to like his art based on the interview alone - I'm funny like that. Be sure to update us if your letter to the editor does make it in to print... I don't believe for a second that he isn't rolling in it with regards to the distribution of his earnings from his pictures. *Everyone* talks about Jackson Pollack, French Impressionists... it makes me want to gag as the 'talk' has become far more important than the art. *gag, gag, gag* posted by: BerlinBear (reply) post date: 06.20.05 (10:58 am) Reply to: lindy Oh man, I'd just written a really really long comment and when I hit Post It! tBlog had a tFit and it was lost. Grrrrrr! Let me sum up much more briefly. 1) I'm with lindy and think that the crapness of that interview was much more the fault of theartist than the interviewer. The same questions - hell even the first question on its own - could ahve led to a fascinating interview if they'd been answered by someone who is less of a numbskull. Accordingly, I reckon you, juni, might have been a bit harsh on both journalist and editor. After all, an interview which demonstrates, look here, this artist everyone thinks is so wonderful with words is actually a knob has its message too, doesn't it? The other thing I crapped on about in the lost comment was that I suspect that letter might not get printed. It's a bit long and a bit too critical of the editorial staff to make the cut I reckon. Or certainly that's the experience I've had when sending similarly long and similarly indignant letters to the editor. Of course, I've been wrong before. Let us know, won't you juni? posted by: juniperflux (reply) post date: 06.20.05 (12:22 pm) Reply to: lindy Oh, I'm with you in terms of finding it difficult to separate the art from the artist, Lindy... the only saving grace for Ruscha, as far as I am concerned, is that I saw his art *before* I knew he was a moron... so I have the previous experience of appreciating him in my ignorance, so to speak. As for Pollack and the like... I agree. That's the reason I sort of liked the "Jack the Dripper" comment. Again, thanks for your thoughts. j posted by: juniperflux (reply) post date: 06.20.05 (12:30 pm) Reply to: BerlinBear Thanks for your take on things. My intent, even if I didn't do a very good job of expressing it, was to scold the editor more than the artist and the interviewer, although I don't hold either of them in very high regard either. As for it being printed, as I said, I'm not holding out for that, but if it happens, I'll spread the word. j posted by: BerlinBear (reply) post date: 06.20.05 (12:33 pm) Reply to: juniperflux Yeah, I picked up that you were scolding the editor too. That's one of the reasons I think it might not get published. Cetainly all letters to the editor I've written which explicitly scold the ed haven't been printed. So, you don't buy my take on it that an interview that shows the interviewee as a chump is worth printing, then? posted by: childish (reply) post date: 06.20.05 (12:34 pm) i actually like ruscha, but yeah, the article was awful. sometimes people miss the mark.....horribly. posted by: juniperflux (reply) post date: 06.20.05 (12:40 pm) Reply to: BerlinBear I didn't say that. The fact that Ruscha is an idiot was disappointing, but not my beef with the article. Had that been the sole problem, I wouldn't have written the letter. j posted by: juniperflux (reply) post date: 06.20.05 (12:40 pm) Reply to: childish Indeed. Well put. j posted by: BerlinBear (reply) post date: 06.20.05 (12:48 pm) Reply to: juniperflux OK, fair call. Just checking. I certainly liked the passion in the letter. posted by: altricial (reply) post date: 06.21.05 (3:00 pm) Oh dear. What a disappointment. I hope your letter has an impact. posted by: gonzoid (reply) post date: 06.23.05 (8:43 am) there was a time when the NYT was an excellent newspaper. as was rolling stone, newsweek, the economist, and horse and pony. these days are no longer. excellent letter though. and get national geographic. if only for the maps. posted by: juniperflux (reply) post date: 06.23.05 (10:18 am) Reply to: gonzoid I abandoned many of those publications long, long ago. I've been clinging to NYT(M), however. I'm afraid it's time to give up the ghost, as it were. Thanks for the map suggestion. posted by: juniperflux (reply) post date: 06.23.05 (1:07 pm) Reply to: altricial Well... it felt good just to write it, so I'm satisfied if nothing more comes of it. Thanks for stopping by though. j |
|
Ed Ruscha is a contemporary American artist whose work has sold at auction for upwards of 3+ million dollars. Like a lot of contemporary art, (ok, all art for that matter), his work doesn't appeal to everyone. However, I'm particularly drawn to his use of language as a visual medium. I once read a review of some of his work in which the critic said that Ruscha's gift lies in his ability to “give words a physical voice.” Sort of like onomatopoeia for your eyes, as it were, and I like that.