Some cool Article Contest pictures:
IMG_0740AA Fra Angelico (Guido di Pietro) 1400-1455. Florence.Retable de la Sainte Trinité. Déposition de Croix.
Image by jean louis mazieres
Fra Angelico (Guido di Pietro) 1400-1455. Florence.Retable de la Sainte Trinité. Déposition de Croix.
Le Couronnement est de Lorenzo Monaco 1370-1435. Noli Me Tangere. Résurrection. Les Femmes au Sépulcre. 1432.
Florence. Museo di San Marco.
Fra Angelico (Guido di Pietro) from 1400 to 1455. Florence.Retable of the Holy Trinity. Deposition from the Cross.
The Coronation of Lorenzo Monaco from 1370 to 1435. Noli Me Tangere. Resurrection. Women on the Sepulcher. 1432.
Florence. Museo di San Marco.
L’ART ET LE BEAU
Pendant des millénaires, en Europe, et dans toutes les civilisations, "le Beau" a été un however et un critère de l’Art, notamment en peinture.
1° Le Beau était le however poursuivi par l’artiste quand il peignait un tableau. De l’époque médiévale à l’Art Moderne, l’artiste a toujours eu pour finalité le Beau. Même quand il entendait peindre une scenario dramatique, ou horrible comme les événements de la ardour du Christ (Retable d’Issenheim) ou l’Enfer ( Bouts, Bosch). Même quand il a entendu peindre les horreurs de la guerre, comme Jacques Callot, Goya ou Otto Dix.
2° Le Beau était reconnu comme tel par consensus.
Comme l’a écrit Mikel Dufrenne dans un article de l’encyclopédie Universalis, le Beau est défini par trois critères que l’on dira objectifs : L’opinion des élites, l’opinion commune de la inhabitants, le temps..
Une excellente définition, pratique, pragmatique, qui ne se noie pas dans les ideas abstraits, la recherche d’une Essence du Beau, et utilise un langage parfaitement compréhensible.
Ces définitions laissent bien sûr la place à l’opinion individuelle et aux goûts de chacun. Comme l’a écrit aussi Mikel Dufrenne dans le même article : "L’œuvre d’art s’impose avec la force de l’évidence, pour le bonheur de qui la contemple."
C’est un quatrième critère, plus subjectif, qui varie en fonction des individus. Telle oeuvre peut procurer du bonheur à telle personne, et pas, ou moins, à telle autre. Mais d’une half le however essentiel de l’artiste était de procurer un bonheur à son public, et ce bonheur était ressenti par une majorité d’hommes de milieux différents.
L’attitude totalement relativiste qui consiste à dire qu’il n’y a pas de critère du Beau, et que tout est affaire de goût personnel, est fausse, par excès, et par méconnaissance des réalités historiques établies. Le Beau est un fait d’expérience. Le Beau est un sentiment de satisfaction, partagé par une massive fraction d’une société, et confirmé par le temps.
Ce qui a changé avec l’Art Contemporain, progressivement, mais très nettement à partir des années 1950, c’est que le Beau n’a plus été un however de l’artwork. Le Laid a même été revendiqué comme une recherche légitime de l’artwork.
Comme le constate très réalistement l’historien d’artwork Ernst Gombrich, l’artwork est devenu "une aventure aux confins de l’impossible et l’art du laid."
L’adhésion idéologique de l’Art Contemporain au Laid est un constat banal, qui a été fait de multiples fois, et qui a été pleinement revendiqué par tous ses théoriciens.
Le critique d’artwork Michel Tapié (1909-1987) constate dans les années 1950-60 que "l’Art Moderne -entendez Art Contemporain- est né le jour où l’idée d’Art et celle de Beauté se sont trouvées disjointes." Il ne critique pas cette disjonction, bien au contraire il la constate et la justifie. "nous avons changé de valeurs".
Cela ne veut pas dire que cela a été pour le mieux ! Il est très significatif que toute l’Europe des Musées distingue les Musées des "Beaux Arts" des "Musées d’Art Contemporain". C’est l’officialisation du divorce de l’Art et du Beau.
Certains critiques commencent à contester vivement l’Art Contemporain officiel. Celui exposé dans les musées. L’Art d’Etat.
Jean Louis Harrouel a proposé une analyse très pertinente, pleine de bon sens, politiquement, économiquement et idéologiquement très fondée de l’Art Contemporain dans son ouvrage "L’Art contemporain, la Grande Falsification". ( Jean Cyrille Godefroy 2009)
En 1999 Jean Monneret avait déjà écrit : « L’art contemporain ? Tous les artistes vivants font partie de l’artwork contemporain. Ce sont les artistes qui font l’artwork. Tous les artistes. Librement !
Or, l’État veut faire croire au public qu’il n’y a qu’un artwork digne d’intérêt, l’artwork dit « contemporain », c’est-à-dire l’artwork d’État. En artwork dit « contemporain », moins il y a à voir, plus il y a à dire ! Dans une exposition d’artwork contemporain, une gaine d’aération, le matériel de secours ou le carrelage des sanitaires se confondent souvent avec les œuvres présentées. La query alors est, où est l’œuvre ? Tant l’harmonie est parfaite entre le contenant et le contenu.
En réalité, l’artwork d’État écarte arbitrairement l’artwork des meilleurs artistes. La démocratie exigerait que l’État, soucieux de l’argent du contribuable, rendît compte de la réalité contemporaine dans toute sa diversité, sans exclusion…"
A la différence de Jean Monneret je n’accuserai pas seulement l’Etat, ou ses fonctionnaires, qui sont, pour la plupart, tout à fait manipulés par plus idéologues et plus puissants qu’eux. Ces décideurs apparents ne font que se conformer à un artistiquement right dont la supply est ailleurs, bien plus haut et bien plus secrète. Ce pourquoi je préfère dire que l’Art Contemporain des musées est un Art Académique ou Officiel.
ART AND BEAUTIFUL
For millennia, in Europe, and in all civilizations, "the Beautiful" was a objective and a criterion of artwork, significantly portray.
1 The Beautiful was the purpose pursued by the artist when he painted an image. From medieval occasions to Modern Art, the artist has allways had intented the Beautiful. Even when he supposed to color a dramatic scenario, or horrible, because the occasions of the Passion of Christ (Issenheim Altarpiece) or Hell (Bouts, Bosch). Even when he heard paint the horrors of conflict, as Jacques Callot, Goya and Otto Dix.
2. The Beautiful was acknowledged as such by consensus.
As Mikel Dufrenne wrote in an article within the Encyclopedia Universalis, the Beau is outlined by three standards targets: The opinion of elites, the widespread opinion of the inhabitants, the time.
An wonderful definition, sensible, pragmatic, that doesn’t drown in summary ideas, the seek for an Essence of Beauty, and makes use of an comprehensible language.
These definitions go away the course as much as the person opinion and tastes. As written additionally Mikel Dufrenne in the identical article: "The work of art is imposed on all, with the strength of the evidence, to the delight of the beholder." It is a fourth criterion, extra subjective, which varies relying on people. Such work can deliver happiness to such an individual, and never, or much less, to a different. But firstly, the first purpose of the artist was to supply happiness to his viewers, and this happiness was felt by a majority of males of various backgrounds.
The totally relativistic perspective of claiming that there isn’t a criterion of Beautiful, and that every part is matter of non-public style, is fake, by extra and by ignorance of the established historic realities. The Beautiful is a reality of expertise. The Beautiful is a sense of satisfaction, shared by a big part of society, and confirmed by time.
What has modified with the Contemporary Art, regularly, however very clearly from the Nineteen Fifties is that Beautiful was not a objective of artwork. The Ugly has even been claimed as a authentic pursuit of artwork.
As famous very real looking artwork historian, Ernst Gombrich, the artwork has grow to be "an adventure to the borders of the impossible and the art of the ugly."
The ideological accession of Contemporary Art on the Ugly is a banal statement, which was finished a number of occasions, and has been totally claimed by its theorists.
The artwork critic Michel Tapié (1909-1987) notes that in 1950-60 "Contemporary Art is born on the day when the idea of Art and that of the beauty found disjointed." He doesn’t criticize this disjunction, quite the opposite he finds and justifies it. "We have changed values."
This is to not say that it was for one of the best! It could be very vital that every one of Europe Museum distinguishes between Museums of the "Beaux Arts" of the "Museum of Contemporary Art". This is the formalization of the divorce between the Art and the Beautiful.
Some critics are starting to strongly contest the official Contemporary Art. The one exhibited within the museums. The Art of State..
Jean Louis Harrouel has proposed a really pertinent evaluation, full of widespread sense, politically, economically and ideologically very based of Contemporary Art in his guide "Contemporary Art, Great Falsification". (Jean Cyril Godefroy 2009)
In 1999 Jean Monneret had already written: "Contemporary artwork? All residing artists are a part of the Contemporary Art. These are the artists who make artwork. All the artists. Freely!
But the State desires to consider to the general public that there it has solely an artwork, worthy of curiosity, the artwork says "Contemporary", that’s to say, the State Art. In artwork referred to as "Contemporary", the much less there’s to see, the extra there’s to say!
In a recent artwork exhibition, a air flow duct, emergency tools or tile sanitary typically merge with the works offered. The query then is, the place is the work? As is ideal concord between the container and the content material.
In actuality, the artwork of State departs arbitrarily the artwork of one of the best artists. Democracy would require the State aware of thetaxpayers’ cash, ought to render account of up to date actuality in all its range, with out exclusion … "
Contrary to Jean Monneret I don’t simply accuse the State or its officers, who’re fully manipulated by ideologues and extra highly effective than they. These obvious determination makers adhere solely to an ideology of the Artistically Correct whose supply can also be a lot larger and extra secret. That why I desire to say that the modern artwork museum is an Academic Art, or Official Art.
Sight glass (Hipstamatic Contest Entry)
Image by Steve Rhodes
Techcrunch reported Synthetic Corp which makes Hypstamtic, SwankoLab, and IncrediBooth has moved from Chicago to San Francisco & they’ve purchased a two-story constructing at 74 Langton they’re going to transfer into in February 2011.
It will probably be "both a worldwide headquarters and a retail/gallery space where events will be held for their community."
The co-founders moved to SF in July and have been working from NextSpace, a cowering area at 28 2nd Street.
techcrunch.com/2010/12/20/hipstamatic-san-francisco/
From the official press launch:
“We are incredibly excited to be setting up shop in San Francisco…” mentioned Lucas Allen Buick, CEO, Co-Founder, Synthetic Corp. “Now, having this building will give us a chance to interact with our community in person and give users a place to display work, hold photoshoots, and be creative.”
www.prweb.com/releases/prweboffice-space/san-francisco/pr…
Architect Douglas Burnham, of Envelope A+D will probably be renovating the constructing.
www.envelopead.com/info_teambio.html
He additionally renovated Pier 24, the biggest picture exhibition area within the US
www.envelopead.com/proj_pier24.html
I had stopped by Electric Works which was close by, so I took some images of 74 with Hipstamatic, 360, and my D7000.
Also a number of issues close by. It is across the nook from Brainwash & close to Sightglass espresso.
It was listed together with 80 Langton the constructing subsequent door. People have been engaged on renovating 80 and one mentioned they’d been working for a couple of month and a half and it had been purchased by artists (it was owned by artists – see the information on New Langton beneath).
He’d heard 74 may need bought, however did not know who purchased it.
Listings say 74 is 3600 sq. ft and was available on the market for just below one million {dollars}.
www.loopnet.com/Listing/16686317/74-80-Langton-Street-San…
And this PDF has the ground plans on the second web page.
www.starboardnet.com/listing_flyers/74%20langton_sale.pdf
A planning division PDF says it’s a historic constructing inbuilt 1908 and utilized by a casket producer in response to a 1950 map.
sf-planning.org/ftp/recordsdata/gis/SouthSoMa/Docs/3730percent20104.pdf
There’s an inside tour video of 74 & 80 Langton
www.youtube.com/watch?v=JN0tObJQn0U
And one other video with actually tacky music
www.youtube.com/watch?v=vY8FyJIFJFU
www.loopnet.com/Listing/16686317/74-80-Langton-Street-San…
www.prepress.com was at 74 (it’s now on eleventh st). They did prepress for make journal – 74 Langton is listed on this web page
makezine.com/advertise/print_specs.csp
New Langton Arts which sadly closed in 2009 was initially referred to as 80 Langton Street and was positioned there from 1975 – 1983.
From an oral historical past of Susan Miller
"1975 actually, in a warehouse space on Langton Street. It was, in fact, an old casket factory in a light-industrial building of the kind common to San Francisco’s South of Market district. The building and facility were owned by a founder, artist Jock Reynolds. The gallery and theater shared one space in a loft rented from Jock by artist and founding member Jim Pomeroy."
www.as-ap.org/oralhistories/interviews/interview-susan-mi…
www.usamuseum.org/new-langton-arts/
blog.sfmoma.org/2009/10/tz-on-pomeroy/
And that is an fascinating piece by Miller on New Langton (which regularly confirmed images) (pdf)
websites.cca.edu/currents/pdf/smiller.pdf
Langton Labs, a stay/work warehouse area isn’t distant at 9 Langton (and one other area throughout the road which was a images studio)
weblog.langtonlabs.org
www.flickr.com/photos/oddwick/5246535163/
online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703572404575634904…
www.flickr.com/photos/glasser/sets/72157608097124770/
www.flickr.com/photos/glasser/collections/72157611567859974/
