-
Aaah! But take a ride ,or better yet, rent a canoe or kayak down the Allegheny River between Tidioute and Tionesta on an autumn afternoon after a rain and glory in the apparent velvety blacks of the conifers in the background framed by the golden leaves of the foreground Quaking Aspens. It is Maya, and it is wondrous.
Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
Last edited by citizenk74; 04-07-2021 at 04:52 PM.
-
04-07-2021 01:26 PM
-
Purely for the purpose of discussion, and based on the principles of Impressionist painters, all surfaces (even black) reflect back (some) color unless there is no light to reflect. I did read recently about a black pigment that reflects NO light. Originally Posted by citizenk74
Aaah! But take a ride down the Allegheny River between Tidioute and Tionesta on an autumn afternoon after a rain and glory in the apparent velvety blacks of the conifers in the background framed by the golden leaves of the foreground Quaking Aspens. It is Maya, and it is wondrous.
Vantablack - Wikipedia
-
" but to say that context is irrelevant is, in my opinion, not correct." zigzag
Hi, Z,
I didn't say that it is irrelevant but rather that " . . . even without this historical context/title, the painting is a masterpiece of human emotion . . . " which means irrespective of its religious/historical narrative, it still can stand alone as a great work of Art. The painting, therefore, could be on one hand a profound depiction of a biblical narrative but this historicity is not necessary for the painting's greatness: superior technique, style, and the implied psychological narrative. Thanks for the reply. I hope this clarifies my position.
Play live . . . Marinero
-
A timely intervention by Richard Williams: the story of Bob Crewe, songwriter and artist.
-
yes it was pretty much the same a few years ago. Plus l'Orengerie reopened, so you can see Water Lillies in breathtaking size, it is literally the IMAX of Monet. Originally Posted by grahambop
However I do not think it was the light, much more our psyche. To experience something genuine touch close is exciting, I tend to believe because the intensity of feelings. The same happened to me in Mozart birthhouse, and Bach's grave, despite the fact both was badly lit :-)
***
Regarding jazz and impressionsm, jazz artists using Ravel or Debussy proves nothing. Actually Chick Corea recorded Mozart piano concertos, Keith Jarrett also recorded Bach. Jarrett jazz improvizations are more close to Chopin (romnticism) then any impressionist composer.
On the artistic side, the concept of jazz are more reminds me to expressionism than impressionism. Miles, Sco, Bill Frisell, Corea, Mehldau all fit into this category, not by musical formal way, but their approach of art.
-
Originally Posted by citizenk74
Aaah! But take a ride ,or better yet, rent a canoe or kayak down the Allegheny River between Tidioute and Tionesta on an autumn afternoon after a rain and glory in the apparent velvety blacks of the conifers in the background framed by the golden leaves of the foreground Quaking Aspens. It is Maya, and it is wondrous.
Sounds spectacular!
But I'd argue none of those "blacks" are actually "black."
-
I would agree 100% with you and apologize for my misinterpretation. In fact, I would suggest that most people do not get the historical, mythological, symbolic, or biblical allusions in most art, especially Renaissance art. What we mostly do, and should, get is whether or not (or how) the imagery resinates in us at a deeper, visceral level. It is this idea that legitimizes abstract (expressionist) art... and Jazz. Originally Posted by Marinero
-
The Met wins on quantity, but MoMa has Starry Night and Water Lilies. The Met's scale can be overwhelming and cause one to blow through and see nothing in an attempt to see as much as you can. I've been to the Met on average I'd guess a couple of times a year for almost my entire life, and I haven't seen anywhere near everything there, but MoMa is basically digestible in a day. I grew up amid a lot of modern and abstract art and I guess just as a matter of familiarity it seems "normal" . Somewhere along the line it hit me that no art is truly realist, not even photography. There's no way to avoid the artist imposing some sense of him/herself, narration, abstraction, and commentary, and no way to avoid you imposing your own interpretation. Ceci n'est pas une pipe, yada yada. Originally Posted by christianm77
John
-
Agreed. In normal light, and isolation, they are grays and browns and very dark greens and on and on. But wet, competing with the glowing golds of the Aspens and Hard Maples and the Scarlets of the Soft (or Red) Maples and the Sumacs, they sure do look black. It's like a huge diorama. Your literal point of view makes all the difference. I've said it many times - if Impressionism (and Pointillism) had not emerged first in Southern France, it would have done so eventually in Northwest Pennsylvania. In the autumn the leaves are spectacular in the full sun. And yet, after a rain, while the skies are yet gray, the wet leaves seem to have an inner glow that is more subtle, but equally compelling in contrast to the neutral sky and the damp, moss-draped trunks of the trees. Perception and context are inseparable, in my experience. Originally Posted by mr. beaumont
-
hah! love that!! ^ Originally Posted by citizenk74
(and warhol came from pittsburgh!)
cheers
ps- and just to tie the room together..warhols kenny b covers
-
OK folks - thread derailment time. While I appreciate thoroughly the musings of modern painting, nature and jazz - swing, bebop, modal, avant garde etc., perhaps we can discuss the relationship of architecture and music, specifically Jazz. I guess it too easy to wrap ourselves around the axle as guitarists to determine how best to define jazz within fine art analogs.
Goethe quote: "Music is liquid architecture: architecture is frozen music".
A. Quincy Jones said "If architecture is frozen music, then music must be liquid architecture".
Lots of ink has been spilt over Goethe's remark - any thoughts?
Patrick
-
I thought writing about music was like dancing about archtiecture? Originally Posted by PatrickB
Joking aside...particularly for jazz musicians who view a tune as a "framework," there's a whole lotta architecture parallels.
-
Some of my solos contravene building regulations, I’m fairly certain of that.
-
Vantablack
-
In film school we got into the history of impressionism. It started some time after the first photographs. Artists were 'freed' from the still image.
-
if jazz goes back 100, 120 years or so I would think it was always impressionist music.
-
Wait- on reflection I think I was referring to the MoMA gift shop as the high point of Western civilisation. You also have all the Van Goghs upstairs. Originally Posted by John A.
Fair play. Good museum. Plays ALL the hits. All killer, no filler.
But you know they are wonderful paintings?
-
The problem is I know even less about architecture than I do about other things. Originally Posted by PatrickB
-
How much more black could this be? And the answer is...none...none more black. Originally Posted by Stevebol
Vantablack
-
Impressionism is an unfortunate term in regards to Debussy as he disliked the label and was not inspired, to my knowledge, by any of the impressionist painters.
Especially now, that impressionism in Art is the domain of little old ladies and hacks like Thomas Kincade, so to set the expectation that Debussy is somehow 'musical Monet' is a real disserviceLast edited by BWV; 04-08-2021 at 05:26 PM.
-
Originally Posted by BWV
Hi, B,
My personal opinion is that the French never had any first-rate composers. Good workmen/craftsmen . . . but none were profound ,IMO, as we see with the Germans and Italians. For example, with Debussy, his "Claire de Lune" has always been mentioned as one of his best and certainly most played compositions but to compare CDL to say one of Chopin's "Nocturnes" or the Adagio movement of Beethoven's "Symphony Pathetique" is certainly comparing the proverbial apples with oranges. It is charming, well-constructed, and pleasant to the ear but there's no trembles of the terra firma after a performance. And, if we go to the works of Puccini, Paganini, and Giuliani, the slant gets greater away from the French. This, however, was not the case with French visual artists as Gauguin, Toulouse-Lautrec, the portraits of Pissarro and Degas, who brought us some of the greatest Art of the ages. So, for me, Debussy doesn't move the water and musical "Impressionism", for me, is music without structure.
So, may I add a disclaimer to those whose feathers might potentially be ruffled: these are MY opinions after a lifetime of study in Music, Art, and Literature. You do not have to agree. But, I would be interested in what YOU think and I promise, I've never put anyone on an "ignore" list in my life for disagreeing with me . . . it's like playing stick ball in the street and the guy who owns the ball gets mad and takes his ball home to end the game. You city guys will get that analogy.
Play live . . . Marinero
-
With all due respect, that is exactly what it is... an opinion. Originally Posted by Marinero
“Claire de Lune” Is a light piece, comparable to, say,“Für Elise”, although more adventurous with harmony and rhythm. Debussy is best known for those sorts of pieces, which can lead to the idea that his music isn’t “serious”. But the large orchestral pieces, the late Cello and Violin sonatas, and theater music such as St. Sébastien are on a different level.
-
Hi, C, Originally Posted by cmajor9
Thanks for the honest reply. Can you provide one video of what you believe is an example of Debussy's best music? I'd like to give it an serious listen.
Play live . . . Marinero
-
A couple here: Originally Posted by Marinero
-
aside from Debussy, Messiaen, Boulez, Dutilleaux, Murail, Grisey, Radulescu, just to pick a few from the 20th century? Originally Posted by Marinero
Reply With Quote
Developing an Individual Style
Yesterday, 07:54 PM in Everything Else