If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#31
|
|||
|
|||
Yeah, I'm not sure if it's intended to be a literal comparison. A little
underdog humour. The reason for mentioning the story is that there is a tendency to underestimate what goes into the creation of art - it seems to get boiled down to time it took to make, or cost of the supplies, or amount of debt incurred, because the other stuff is intangible and I think we tend to try to quantify things to make them fit neatly into our understanding of value. Another example here in Canada was the purchase of a very famous modernist painting by Barnett Newman called Voices of Fire for several million dollars. The painting is very large and consists of three large stripes of colour. That there should be debate around the expenditure of public dollars is right and good, but the thing that was most disheartening was that the most commonly voiced criticism was, "I could do that." Same with Jackson Pollock. Seems to miss the point to my mind - an aesthetic object has intrinsic value. Now that I think of it, how much the neurosurgeon has studied or went into debt doesn't gauge their value either - it's their ability to save lives. And the amount they are able to charge is built on the amount the public is willing to pay for the service they provide - in the case of successfully removing brain tumours, quite high. In the case of an enriching object of aesthetic value that will have a subtle impact on your day every time you see or touch it, a little harder to judge. The point that I'm making, or even rather the question that I'm asking, is, "Have we internalized the devaluation of what we do?" Or is there even a devaluation of what we do? Self-deprecating humour like "underwater basket-weaving" (from another post) and magnificent pieces of pottery being sold for far below what I believe they should be suggests to me that perhaps we have. Or perhaps we're merely responding to the market reality of what a person can reasonably expect to receive in return for their work. What I do know is that I've never gone up to anyone, potter or otherwise and offered them more than their listed price. And it seems to me, that in such a solitary profession, communities such as this newsgroup are a useful forum for discussing these things. Just the fact that there have been 31 posts in response to an ad about someone who decides not to do pottery because they want a Land Rover, suggests to me that the issue raised - society's valuation of our chosen profession - hit a few nerves, and I'm fascinated by the responses it has generated. Cheers to everyone. Simon "Bob Masta" wrote in message ... On Wed, 24 Mar 2004 20:23:57 -0500, wrote: This puts me in mind of a famous story about my other profession, one that pays slightly less than pottery: writing. Legend has it that a very celebrated Canadian novelist, Margaret Laurence, was at a gala and was engaged in conversation with a neurosurgeon. At a point in the conversation he confessed that he had always wanted to write a novel and was thinking he might do it when he retired. At which she exclaimed, "What a coincidence! I'm planning on becoming a neurosurgeon when I retire!" Of course, the difference is that just about anyone can write a novel or make pottery, with minimal training. Whether the novel or pottery is popular with the public is another matter. The neurosurgeon put in plenty of years in training before he became certified, and now he can have a whack at brain tumors and collect big bucks to do so. I sure wouldn't want to see writing or pottery limited to those who spent 8 years in training and went $100K in debt to get certified. Let's face it, these are two different worlds. The neruosurgeon picked a career in a field where there was an established critical need, and he paid his dues to get there. However much effort an artist expends in training (and I imagine it's nowhere near what an MD expends), it's simply not a "critical need" field. We can each pick our own chosen path. If someone really has a craving for material success, there are paths that make that more probable. Those who choose paths for other reasons can't expect that the material rewards will be the same. Another aspect is that MD training is *extremely* selective about who gets into medical school, but once you are accepted they make every effort to insure you are a good doctor before turning you loose. But since anyone can take up art, and no certification (thankfully!), there is a wider distribution in skill levels and quality of end product. If I pick up a novel by a brain surgeon and decide I don't like it, it's no big deal. Not so with brain surgery by a novelist! Bob Masta dqatechATdaqartaDOTcom D A Q A R T A Data AcQuisition And Real-Time Analysis www.daqarta.com |
Ads |
#32
|
|||
|
|||
Talking about the fact that we is a solitary bunch... Spending most of our
lives alone in our workshops, only emerging, blinking in the unaccustomed sunlite to sell our wares to an under (or over) educated public that neither knows nor cares what we do but only if it matches the curtains.... It's hard to get the constructive criticism that we got @ art school.... What we've done is to bunch a few of us together based on the fact that we all live and work within a few miles, and work in our backyards, and formed a group thta meets every month or so, with a few beers and a bit of food, to look @ each others pots with the critical eye, and discuss problems (glazes, forms, all sorts).... Helps with the solitude try it sometime Hugz Eddie wrote in message . .. Yeah, I'm not sure if it's intended to be a literal comparison. A little underdog humour. The reason for mentioning the story is that there is a tendency to underestimate what goes into the creation of art - it seems to get boiled down to time it took to make, or cost of the supplies, or amount of debt incurred, because the other stuff is intangible and I think we tend to try to quantify things to make them fit neatly into our understanding of value. Another example here in Canada was the purchase of a very famous modernist painting by Barnett Newman called Voices of Fire for several million dollars. The painting is very large and consists of three large stripes of colour. That there should be debate around the expenditure of public dollars is right and good, but the thing that was most disheartening was that the most commonly voiced criticism was, "I could do that." Same with Jackson Pollock. Seems to miss the point to my mind - an aesthetic object has intrinsic value. Now that I think of it, how much the neurosurgeon has studied or went into debt doesn't gauge their value either - it's their ability to save lives. And the amount they are able to charge is built on the amount the public is willing to pay for the service they provide - in the case of successfully removing brain tumours, quite high. In the case of an enriching object of aesthetic value that will have a subtle impact on your day every time you see or touch it, a little harder to judge. The point that I'm making, or even rather the question that I'm asking, is, "Have we internalized the devaluation of what we do?" Or is there even a devaluation of what we do? Self-deprecating humour like "underwater basket-weaving" (from another post) and magnificent pieces of pottery being sold for far below what I believe they should be suggests to me that perhaps we have. Or perhaps we're merely responding to the market reality of what a person can reasonably expect to receive in return for their work. What I do know is that I've never gone up to anyone, potter or otherwise and offered them more than their listed price. And it seems to me, that in such a solitary profession, communities such as this newsgroup are a useful forum for discussing these things. Just the fact that there have been 31 posts in response to an ad about someone who decides not to do pottery because they want a Land Rover, suggests to me that the issue raised - society's valuation of our chosen profession - hit a few nerves, and I'm fascinated by the responses it has generated. Cheers to everyone. Simon "Bob Masta" wrote in message ... On Wed, 24 Mar 2004 20:23:57 -0500, wrote: This puts me in mind of a famous story about my other profession, one that pays slightly less than pottery: writing. Legend has it that a very celebrated Canadian novelist, Margaret Laurence, was at a gala and was engaged in conversation with a neurosurgeon. At a point in the conversation he confessed that he had always wanted to write a novel and was thinking he might do it when he retired. At which she exclaimed, "What a coincidence! I'm planning on becoming a neurosurgeon when I retire!" Of course, the difference is that just about anyone can write a novel or make pottery, with minimal training. Whether the novel or pottery is popular with the public is another matter. The neurosurgeon put in plenty of years in training before he became certified, and now he can have a whack at brain tumors and collect big bucks to do so. I sure wouldn't want to see writing or pottery limited to those who spent 8 years in training and went $100K in debt to get certified. Let's face it, these are two different worlds. The neruosurgeon picked a career in a field where there was an established critical need, and he paid his dues to get there. However much effort an artist expends in training (and I imagine it's nowhere near what an MD expends), it's simply not a "critical need" field. We can each pick our own chosen path. If someone really has a craving for material success, there are paths that make that more probable. Those who choose paths for other reasons can't expect that the material rewards will be the same. Another aspect is that MD training is *extremely* selective about who gets into medical school, but once you are accepted they make every effort to insure you are a good doctor before turning you loose. But since anyone can take up art, and no certification (thankfully!), there is a wider distribution in skill levels and quality of end product. If I pick up a novel by a brain surgeon and decide I don't like it, it's no big deal. Not so with brain surgery by a novelist! Bob Masta dqatechATdaqartaDOTcom D A Q A R T A Data AcQuisition And Real-Time Analysis www.daqarta.com |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Commercial | Bertrand M. | Jewelry | 0 | July 20th 04 04:10 PM |
commercial manufacture of lenses and mirrors | Allan Adler | Glass | 13 | January 8th 04 12:44 AM |
Blatant Commercial Post, But its such a deal!! | Javahut | Glass | 18 | November 22nd 03 02:19 PM |
Commercial Glassblowers? | GOD | Glass | 13 | September 4th 03 01:53 PM |