Walter Logeman: Journal
I am looking forward to the Apple Tablet. The main thing I’d want to be able to do is to use it instead of my Toshiba M200 for sketching. I did a Thousand Sketches 2006-7 on the Toshiba M200 which has a Wacom style pen only touch screen. Worked well for me. It is pressure sensitive, and highly responsive. So I hope the Tablet will have something like a pen or better.
A long iWishlist follows.
Having a great time in Sydney. Gallery yesterday. The above is one of quite a few from the Gallery of NSW posted into a set on Flickr.
I listened to this interview on Kim Hill – Kate de Goldie on Charles Keeper, & became curious about the art she was talking about.
I’ve found some images & posted them below, more quirky than I thought. I like them.
I thought that Yves Klein’s Blue must have been the purest blue #0000ff, all the blues and nothing else.
But not so. I discovered that IKB is in fact #002FA7
| #0000ff – Mathematially pure blue? | |
| #002FA7 – International Klein Blue | |
| #8B8BFF – mid-point light blue |
Zeitgeist. Time ghost. Spirit of the times. What is going on?
I was in tune with the Zeitgeist while going on marches in 1968-9. I was in tune with the Zeitgeist in 1969-70 when I was going into communal living and alternative schools. And again with personal growth all through the 80s. Psychodrama groups, and psychotherapy. And in the very early 90s setting up Psybernet as an online enterprise, I could see the dot.com era looming, (sadly I was out of sync with monetising my insight) I have loved being experientially involved in a world changing era.
I am curious about my current interested in art & creativity?
Am I sniffing something that is in the air?
I am curious… what do you think, is it time for a reaction against the pragmatic, quick, efficient, functional business like era we have been in? Is there a swing to art, beauty & truth?
They say that the … genius is always ahead of his time. True, but
only because he’s so thoroughly of his time.Henry Miller, Preface to The Subterraneans,
by Jack kerouac, 1959
We don’t know who discovered water, but we know it wasn’t the fish.
The past went that-a-way. When faced with a totally new situation, we tend always to attach ourselves to the objects, to the flavor of the most recent past. We look at the present through a rear view mirror. We march backwards into the future.
The poet, the artist, the sleuth – whoever sharpens our perception tends to be anti-social; rarely “well-adjusted”, he cannot go along with currents and trends. A strange bond often exists among anti-social types in their power to see environments as they really are.
What we call art would seem to be specialist artifacts for enhancing human perception.
Marshall McLuhan
Shakespeare’s Royal Self
by James Kirsch, M.D.
The root of all neurosis is the refusal to accept conflict consciously; once an unconscious conflict becomes conscious, it is no longer neurotic and neurotic suffering is replaced by authentic suffering, which brings about the healing of neurosis
This is by Ediger – found it in my old EditThisPage Weblog File (will post that up soon.) I like the quote and did a search for it, but only found my original post. PLUS other nice stuff.
Particularly the item linked here by James Kirsch. The cgjungpage is such a great resource! What struck me most was the quote from Jung. I am relating this to my earlier posts re Hillman and also to the nature of the NET.
The Net is an expression of the collective unconscious – like all great art. That is a BIG idea.
Art, by its very nature, is not science, and science is essentially not art, both provinces of the mind, therefore, have a reservation that is peculiar to them, and that can be explained only from themselves. Hence when we speak of the relation between psychology and art, we are treating only of that aspect of art which without encroachment can be submitted to a psychological manner of approach. Whatever psychology is able to determine about art will be confined to the psychological process of artistic activity, and will have nothing whatever to do with the innermost nature of art itself.
What contribution can analytical psychology make to the root problem of artistic ‘creation,’ that is, the mystery of the creative energy? . . . Inasmuch as ‘no created mind can penetrate the inner soul of Nature,’ you will surely not expect the impossible from our psychology, namely a valid explanation of that great mystery of life, that we immediately feel in the creative impulse. Like every other science psychology has only a modest contribution to make towards the better and deeper understanding of the phenomena of life, it is no nearer than its sisters to absolute knowledge.
C. G. JUNG
Mona Lisa . [dead] . Now http://web.archive.org/web/20010222162001/http://studiolo.org:80/Mona/MONASV12.htm
“Most probably it was Sigmund Freud’s influential essay on Leonardo’s homosexuality and Freud’s consequential analysis of the Mona Lisa which was the direct or proximate impetus for Duchamp’s image. But, whereas Duchamp seems to imply that the picture fuses artist and sitter, male and female, Freud suggests that the Mona Lisa (specifically her smile) is a manifestation of Leonardo’s submerged memory of the birth mother from whom he was estranged at age four and who Freud theorizes expressed an unnatural affection toward her young son. In fact, Freud refutes the notion that there is a physiognomic similarity between the artist and the sitter, but goes on to suggest that the device of the smile was obviously so meaningful to the artist, using it frequently in his works of the time, it must have repressed significance. The person behind the Mona Lisa, Freud suggests, may have had such a smile, a smile that evoked long ago suppressed memories of his mother. Indeed, as Freud is quick to point out, this seems to have been a persistent theme: Vasari even noted that at the earliest age Leonardo was known for having created images of smiling women:
Let us leave the physiognomic riddle of Mona Lisa unsolved, and let us note the unequivocal fact that her smile fascinated the artist no less than all spectators for these 400 years. This captivating smile had thereafter returned in all of his pictures and in those of his pupils. As Leonardo’s Mona Lisa was a portrait, we cannot assume that he has added to her face a trait of his own, so difficult to express, which she herself did not possess. It seems, we cannot help but believe, that he found this smile in his model and became so charmed by it that from now on he endowed it on all the free creations of his phantasy.
“(Sigmund Freud, Leonardo da Vinci: A study in psychosexuality. tr. A.A. Brill. New York, Vintage Books, [1955] Originally published by Freud in 1910, p. 79.)”
December 2000
Janet Abbate, Inventing the Internet. MIT Press, 1999. Reviewed by Linda Baughman.
Peter Lunenfeld, Snap to Grid: A User’s Guide to Digital Arts, Media, and Cultures. MIT Press, 2000. Reviewed by Bryan Alexander.
Review Essay: Anthony Wilhelm, Democracy in a Digital Age: Challenges to Political Life in Cyberspace (Routledge, 2000); Elaine Kamarck and Joseph Nye, Democracy.com? Governance in a Networked World (Hollis Publishing, 1999); and Richard Davis, The Web of Politics: The Internet’s Impact on the American Political System (Oxford University Press, 1999). Reviewed by Philip Howard.
Three reviews, as regular as clockwork. Well maintained site. I get notified every time – see the spyonit link on the left.
Interview