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 |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
I think you are right on Roxan. Dan and I frequently purchase art from
unknowns because we love the artwork. Maybe someday they'll be famous or maybe they already are and we don't know it. The fact remains we buy what calls to us. "roxan" wrote in message ... Since there was so much controversy about the value of beads and how much one can get for them because of their reputation, I thought this brings up an interesting topic. Pablo Picasso once said that since most people don't really know the difference between great art and mediocre art work, it didn't matter to him to do great work towards the end of his life, all he had to do was put his name on a piece of paper and it would sell for millions. This angered him since he wanted his art to be recognized because he was a great artist not because of his name. I think the same would apply to jewelry makers and bead artists. If you can get a exorbitant about of money just because you have a good reputation for doing good beads or jewelry, what would inspire you to take the time to continue to do great work if mediocre work would sell at the same price as great work would. My feeling on this is that each art work should be looked at for it's own artist creation not because someone famous make it. If you didn't know the name of the person who made it would you pay the same price because it was great work or would you pass it up for an unknown artist that made equally good work but who doesn't have a well know reputation yet? I know which one I would chose, it would be great art no matter who did it. I know art is in the eye of the beholder which is very subjective, so for me it comes down to what I really love and would appreciate owning no matter who made it. Roxan |
Ads |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Great big hugs for you Roxan! (((( ROXAN ))))
You said what I was thinking and couldn't put into words. Thank you... I love it when I have friends who help me think and remember. Harry On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 14:18:42 -0500, "roxan" wrote: Since there was so much controversy about the value of beads and how much one can get for them because of their reputation, I thought this brings up an interesting topic. Pablo Picasso once said that since most people don't really know the difference between great art and mediocre art work, it didn't matter to him to do great work towards the end of his life, all he had to do was put his name on a piece of paper and it would sell for millions. This angered him since he wanted his art to be recognized because he was a great artist not because of his name. I think the same would apply to jewelry makers and bead artists. If you can get a exorbitant about of money just because you have a good reputation for doing good beads or jewelry, what would inspire you to take the time to continue to do great work if mediocre work would sell at the same price as great work would. My feeling on this is that each art work should be looked at for it's own artist creation not because someone famous make it. If you didn't know the name of the person who made it would you pay the same price because it was great work or would you pass it up for an unknown artist that made equally good work but who doesn't have a well know reputation yet? I know which one I would chose, it would be great art no matter who did it. I know art is in the eye of the beholder which is very subjective, so for me it comes down to what I really love and would appreciate owning no matter who made it. Roxan My Ebay Auctions are at http://snipurl.com/3okw |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Great art verses reputation
Since there was so much controversy about the value of beads and how much one can get for them because of their reputation, I thought this brings up an interesting topic. Pablo Picasso once said that since most people don't really know the difference between great art and mediocre art work, it didn't matter to him to do great work towards the end of his life, all he had to do was put his name on a piece of paper and it would sell for millions. This angered him since he wanted his art to be recognized because he was a great artist not because of his name. I think the same would apply to jewelry makers and bead artists. If you can get a exorbitant about of money just because you have a good reputation for doing good beads or jewelry, what would inspire you to take the time to continue to do great work if mediocre work would sell at the same price as great work would. My feeling on this is that each art work should be looked at for it's own artist creation not because someone famous make it. If you didn't know the name of the person who made it would you pay the same price because it was great work or would you pass it up for an unknown artist that made equally good work but who doesn't have a well know reputation yet? I know which one I would chose, it would be great art no matter who did it. I know art is in the eye of the beholder which is very subjective, so for me it comes down to what I really love and would appreciate owning no matter who made it. Roxan |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
My feeling on this is that each art work should be looked
at for it's own artist creation not because someone famous make it. Yes. But people are lemmings...not all, but many of them are, anyway. ~~ Sooz ------- "Those in the cheaper seats clap. The rest of you rattle your jewelry." John Lennon (1940 - 1980) Royal Varieties Performance ~ Dr. Sooz's Bead Links http://airandearth.netfirms.com/soozlinkslist.html |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Well Harry the great artist takes from the world that which is ordinary or
even ugly to others and makes it beautiful. This is why I said to you that the shells you do don't have to be perfectly round or oval but interesting to make it more beautiful when you embellish it with your own creativity. I always know when one on my pieces will sell right away when my dear husband says he doesn't like it. I say great I know it will sell then. He doesn't have a great eye for great art. LOL Roxan "Harry" wrote in message ... Great big hugs for you Roxan! (((( ROXAN )))) You said what I was thinking and couldn't put into words. Thank you... I love it when I have friends who help me think and remember. Harry On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 14:18:42 -0500, "roxan" wrote: Since there was so much controversy about the value of beads and how much one can get for them because of their reputation, I thought this brings up an interesting topic. Pablo Picasso once said that since most people don't really know the difference between great art and mediocre art work, it didn't matter to him to do great work towards the end of his life, all he had to do was put his name on a piece of paper and it would sell for millions. This angered him since he wanted his art to be recognized because he was a great artist not because of his name. I think the same would apply to jewelry makers and bead artists. If you can get a exorbitant about of money just because you have a good reputation for doing good beads or jewelry, what would inspire you to take the time to continue to do great work if mediocre work would sell at the same price as great work would. My feeling on this is that each art work should be looked at for it's own artist creation not because someone famous make it. If you didn't know the name of the person who made it would you pay the same price because it was great work or would you pass it up for an unknown artist that made equally good work but who doesn't have a well know reputation yet? I know which one I would chose, it would be great art no matter who did it. I know art is in the eye of the beholder which is very subjective, so for me it comes down to what I really love and would appreciate owning no matter who made it. Roxan My Ebay Auctions are at http://snipurl.com/3okw |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 14:18:42 -0500, "roxan"
wrote: Since there was so much controversy about the value of beads and how much one can get for them because of their reputation, I thought this brings up an interesting topic. Pablo Picasso once said that since most people don't really know the difference between great art and mediocre art work, it didn't matter to him to do great work towards the end of his life, all he had to do was put his name on a piece of paper and it would sell for millions. This angered him since he wanted his art to be recognized because he was a great artist not because of his name. I think the same would apply to jewelry makers and bead artists. If you can get a exorbitant about of money just because you have a good reputation for doing good beads or jewelry, what would inspire you to take the time to continue to do great work if mediocre work would sell at the same price as great work would. You raise an interesting topic. I submit that even a reputable artist would eventually suffer from that mediocrity because the collectors would stop buying after a time. Yes, I believe they would. The general buying populace might not but they tend to be a fickle mistress at the best of times. My feeling on this is that each art work should be looked at for it's own artist creation not because someone famous make it. If you didn't know the name of the person who made it would you pay the same price because it was great work or would you pass it up for an unknown artist that made equally good work but who doesn't have a well know reputation yet? I know which one I would chose, it would be great art no matter who did it. I know art is in the eye of the beholder which is very subjective, so for me it comes down to what I really love and would appreciate owning no matter who made it. Roxan I agree with you to a point. I don't see it as "either/or" but "all the above". -- Margie http://www.handcraftedjewelry.com/st...asp?userid=261 |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
I think you may have misspoken. If it angered Picasso that people were
more interested in his signature than his art's quality, I think he must have said, it didn't matter to his *customers* if he did great work toward the end of his life. Tina "roxan" wrote in message ... Since there was so much controversy about the value of beads and how much one can get for them because of their reputation, I thought this brings up an interesting topic. Pablo Picasso once said that since most people don't really know the difference between great art and mediocre art work, it didn't matter to him to do great work towards the end of his life, all he had to do was put his name on a piece of paper and it would sell for millions. This angered him since he wanted his art to be recognized because he was a great artist not because of his name. I think the same would apply to jewelry makers and bead artists. If you can get a exorbitant about of money just because you have a good reputation for doing good beads or jewelry, what would inspire you to take the time to continue to do great work if mediocre work would sell at the same price as great work would. My feeling on this is that each art work should be looked at for it's own artist creation not because someone famous make it. If you didn't know the name of the person who made it would you pay the same price because it was great work or would you pass it up for an unknown artist that made equally good work but who doesn't have a well know reputation yet? I know which one I would chose, it would be great art no matter who did it. I know art is in the eye of the beholder which is very subjective, so for me it comes down to what I really love and would appreciate owning no matter who made it. Roxan |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
An artist doesn't necessarily make something beautiful, but will make
something meaningful. Actually, it is the artisan who is more likely to make something beautiful. Tina "roxan" ...the great artist takes from the world that which is ordinary or even ugly to others and makes it beautiful. Roxan |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Even more, I think it would cause suffering to the *artist*. And presumably
if the artist is reputable, he won't be so broke that he has to sell inferior work to put bread on the table. Tina "Margie" wrote ... You raise an interesting topic. I submit that even a reputable artist would eventually suffer from that mediocrity because the collectors would stop buying after a time. Yes, I believe they would. The general buying populace might not but they tend to be a fickle mistress at the best of times. -- Margie |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
No I don't think I misspoken at all. He didn't have customers he had people
who would buy his work because they could make a mint on him no matter what he did not necessary that it was great art. It is like the story of the emperor who has no clothes. No one would tell him the truth that he wasn't dressed. The difference here is Picasso knew when he wasn't being told the truth about his work. He knew they would buy **** if it had his name on it. Roxan "Christina Peterson" wrote in message news:1077306684.443812@prawn... I think you may have misspoken. If it angered Picasso that people were more interested in his signature than his art's quality, I think he must have said, it didn't matter to his *customers* if he did great work toward the end of his life. Tina "roxan" wrote in message ... Since there was so much controversy about the value of beads and how much one can get for them because of their reputation, I thought this brings up an interesting topic. Pablo Picasso once said that since most people don't really know the difference between great art and mediocre art work, it didn't matter to him to do great work towards the end of his life, all he had to do was put his name on a piece of paper and it would sell for millions. This angered him since he wanted his art to be recognized because he was a great artist not because of his name. I think the same would apply to jewelry makers and bead artists. If you can get a exorbitant about of money just because you have a good reputation for doing good beads or jewelry, what would inspire you to take the time to continue to do great work if mediocre work would sell at the same price as great work would. My feeling on this is that each art work should be looked at for it's own artist creation not because someone famous make it. If you didn't know the name of the person who made it would you pay the same price because it was great work or would you pass it up for an unknown artist that made equally good work but who doesn't have a well know reputation yet? I know which one I would chose, it would be great art no matter who did it. I know art is in the eye of the beholder which is very subjective, so for me it comes down to what I really love and would appreciate owning no matter who made it. Roxan |
|
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
AD-December 6-7, 2003 Cleveland, OH Great Lakes States Intergalactic Bead Festival | Phineas T Beadd Director National Bead Society | Beads | 5 | December 5th 03 03:32 AM |
AD-Cleveland, OH December 6-7, 2003 Great Lakes States Intergalactic Bead Festival | Phineas T Beadd Director National Bead Society | Beads | 0 | November 26th 03 03:33 PM |
AD: Great Stone beads on eBay | meijhana | Beads | 0 | October 30th 03 12:20 PM |
AD: Something's stirring in the Great Black Swamp - Tink | Tink | Beads | 31 | October 2nd 03 03:05 AM |
AD: Angel of Fire and other great new kits! | Karleen/Vibrant Jewels | Beads | 0 | August 13th 03 04:53 AM |