ohthereishopebannerspray

Saturday, September 27, 2008

New York City, New York Day 2

So my second day in Manhattan was everything I hoped a second day could be. Brigid's birthday was actually this day and her friends made her lots of cakes of all sorts.

In the AM we went and got some of that lovely oatmeal and then planned our day. I wanted to hit some art museums but we slept in pretty late so we decided that it would be smart to just go to one and try to give it an appropriate amount of our time. I chose the MET. Next time in in NYC I'll check out the Guggenheim and the MOMA.

The reason I chose the MET was because of my college graduation ceremony. The director of the MET, Philippe de Montebello, was our speaker at the ceremony. Honestly, before that I didn't know a think about him or the MET. His speach was so astounding and encouraging that I just had to go to the MET while he was still the director. He announced earlier this year that, after over 30 years of service to the MET and the USA as a whole, he was going to be retiring by the end of 2008. His story is quite remarkable and, if I could find a biography of him I'd post where to get it here but I can't, I'll try to get the transcript of the speech he gave and post it someday because it's definitely worth the read. Anyway this is why I chose the MET.

And what a good choice it was!


Man, I think Geeta and I could have spent like 48 hours in the MET and we still wouldn't have seen everything. To keep things short, my favorite parts were:

1. The Egyptian Temple of Dendur (c.a. 15 BC) that they moved stone for stone from Egypt to the MET in order to save it from flooding in Egypt.
The best thing about this Temple is the graffiti carved into the ancient ancient structure by fools from the 1700's and the 1800's. Literally "Joe-schmo was here in 1816" types of stuff... in all different languages and stuff. Hilarious! Those "tags" are now forever preserved at the MET. What an honor. haha


2. Chuck Close's work. I studied him pretty thoroughly during my years in Art School but have never actually seen any of his work in person. It's amazing and just makes me enjoy humanity.


3. Georgia O'Keeffe's work. I've loved her work since like 3rd grade when I had to do a report on her. I've seen some of her paintings in person before but never so many at once.

4. And this.
Yes folks that's bike frame art on display in the middle of the contemporary art wing of the MET. Not sure much about it I just thought I'd add it. Pretty appropriate considering why I was in NYC in the first place. haha.

I was pretty sad to leave the MET. Next time I'm in NYC I'm going to dedicate a WHOLE DAY to it. Oh, here's a fun fact- the MET has a huge cafeteria with it's own sushi chef! Yes, for a snack you can have MET sushi. Yes, of COURSE we did it. This museum really got me thinking... about war. Yes, war. If another nation decided to attack us and bomb the heck out of New York, or any other city for that matter, it's not just an attack on one group of people- it's an attack on all of humanity. We have HUMANITY's history and art in that museum and many many originals. We have art form the WORLD that makes up such an important human history. I can't imagine our loss if it was destroyed because of diplomatic differences. The same, however, can be said of any nation. How many museums have we Americans destroyed in other countries. How much of our own history has been lost alongside it? Art is such a unifying aspect of life. It's an international language and can ignite more feelings and meaning than almost any other form of expression. A book can be written about ideas or a story and then translated but you never have to translate a painting, a sculpture, a photograph. It just all hit me at once how petty our differences are and how precious our history is. How man cultures are there in humanity's past that we know NOTHING about?! If NYC ever got nuked so much of the earth's history would be lost. How much is lost already?
ugh

Anyway,

On the way to the MET we strolled through Central Park. The whole walk only look us like 30 minutes IF THAT. She is so lucky to live so close to all of these wonderful things.


Ok fast forward to that evening. Brigid and her friends all decided they should have a birthday dinner at the Chinese food restaurant right across the street from Columbia. We did this and I invited a few old friends. Margot, my very best friend from high school who I haven't seen in like 4 years came with her girlfriend. One of my closest friends from SCAD, Abigail, came with another friend who just recently moved to NYC from Utah, James. OH MY GOSH IT WAS SOOOO GOOD TO SEE THEM!!!!! Margot only stayed for a bit but I got to catch up with her and finally meet her girlfriend! They look awesome and I'm so glad they are doing well.

I didn't get a photo of Abigail, James, and I for some stupid reason but we hung out much later into the night. We took a few laps around the block that Geeta lives on and talked and talked. It was sooo refreshing to see them. Abigail is one of my most esteemed friends and what she brings to the world is so important. She has her priorities straight and constantly encourages me to continue to follow my dreams. I love her a lot. It was great seeing James too because we miss him so much here in SLC! James was my very first friend here in SLC because he knew Abigail and she helped me move in! It's good to know I have friends like these in New York. I can't wait to see them again. Oh my gosh I almost forgot, while we were walking and catching up a RAT literally ran over all of our feet. Abigail FREAKED out and that got me freaking out an James like KICKED it into the park. HAHa we survived a NYC rat attack!

So we finally got to bed late, but only after getting some music from Geeta's awesome friend CHRIS. YOU ARE AWESOME CHRIS THANKS FOR THE HOOKUP! Thank God there's at least ONE hardcore kid at Columbia. He lives down the hall from Brigid and even helped come and pick me up the first night I was there... good because two girls alone with a HUGE BOX on the subways at 3am without a big hardcore kid is not a good idea ;) Thanks Chris!

So the next morning we really just took it easy. We got up, ate some food, went to this church down the street from her school, and then I went back to sleep untill like 2pm.

The view from her dorm room on this rainy morning

I said my goodbyes and then Geeta and I jumped on the subway to Penn Staion where it was then up to me to figure out how the heck to take the train all of the way to NJ to my airport in Newark. It turned out to be not as hard as I thought although it was like, um, total chaos. There are seriously like NO rail-station people around to help you... you have to do everything through computer and then when your train comes you have no idea what rail it's going to be on until it actually GETS there and then you have to like RUN to the correct door that leads to it's tracks. Then you have to fight your way through the door and get your luggage stored (i didn't have anything but a backpack thank GOD) and then sit as fast as you can so you actually have a seat. THEN you look around and realize that the train is tottally packed and there are people seriously standing. I mean do they ever cut off the tickets at capacity??! I guess not. I mean seriously! Then you have to listen and MAKE SURE you get off at the right stop because there are NO MAPS IN THE TRAIN so you have to talk to like random people and make sure you know what's up. The problem is that most people don't have any clue what's up. haha. Somehow by God's good grace I ended up at the airport checking in only to hear....

that my airplane is like an hour behind and that it was going to be literally impossible to make my connecting flight in Dallas. Yes the flight I was absolutely going to miss happened to be the last flight of the night out of Dallas to SLC so, before I even got through security I knew I was going to be spending the night in my connecting city. Gag. Even better, I guess the plane with late because of weather so here's the guy at the ticketing booth telling me that not only will i have to spend the night in Dallas but that they won't pay for a place for me to stay so my options are either pay 50 bucks for a hotel room or sleep in the airport.

The flight was lovely but Dallas... DALLAS?! Lame. Anyway I ended up going the hotel rout and after waiting over an hour for the shuttle to pick me up I ended up at a relatively nice hotel. I saved some money on the room because I got some sort of discount but it was still 50 bucks and I had to get dinner. There was a sleezy sports bar next to the hotel (the only restaurant around) and six flags was literally in my backyard but closed for some reason. Closed? It was only like 10:30pm. Maybe the season is over for 6 flags? Who knows. Anyway I got a sandwich to go from the bar and then watched TV till I passed out. Got up the next morning, got free breakfast, and got GOING. I was back in SLC by 1pm and went straight to bed.

What a trip. Would I do it again? Yes of COURSE.. however I'm going to wait until I have enough money saved up to do it next time. No more credit card trips fosho. It's ironic isn't it? I'm in NYC during Wall Street's demise and I'm doing exactly what crashed the markets- living beyond my means... for the last time. woo!

We could be closer than you know,
Chelsea

Labels: , , , , , , , ,

10 Comments:

Blogger Esther said...

That cake is sweet! It reminds me of one I made for my dorm roommate my first year at the U...stacked oreos haha...that one's much cooler.

I like what you said about art as a unifying aspect of life. As we've all heard, a picture is worth a thousand words. What we don't realize, is that it's a thousand words in every language. It's a very beautiful thought indeed. However, I think to mourn the loss and destruction of art is sometimes a mistake.

As an aspiring artist myself, I have found that I often get attached to my work. This happens to many artists, because art is usually an extension of oneself, and in it, there is the possibility of immortality. The thing is, art doesn't last forever, at least the original work doesn't. Even if it remains untouched by war, photographs fade, paint cracks, paper turns to ash, and even hard drives crash (ooh those are some good rhymes haha). Fortunately, we have the capability of making copies in this day and age, so our art can live on forever in other forms!

The beautiful thing about destruction is the opportunity for rebirth and a new beginning. It is always tragic when we lose classic works of art, especially when they are victims of violence, but I believe we should embrace the loss and view it as an opening for new and fresh work. Let us remember it, and pay our respects, by continuing its inspiration and beginning our own legacy.
Many people believe art is almost supernatural, other worldly. It is the highest form of expression and thought. Artists are creators, gods. This is why we put it up in fancy galleries and museums, where the elite and intellectual can drink expensive wine and applaud at the genius. Well I believe that worthwhile art speaks to everyone. It needs no explanation, or translation, as you said Chelsea. It's mortality brings it down to earth, allows us to connect to it. Like us it grows old, like us it dies, like us it is remembered, and like us it is forgotten.
No worries though, there will always be more :)

I'm sending myself to NYC in a box with you next time. It's the one city in the US that I want to visit more than any other place and it sounds like you had some grand adventures!

8:41 PM  
Blogger Chelsea said...

Ok I have a realllly long reply to your comment! I'm SO GLAD YOU COMMENTED! Here it goes:
Esther, Yes I agree that it is near impossible to create art that lasts forever. Some artists cringe at the thought of their art lasting more than a month. This is why i love street art and follow blogs like the Wooster Collective and the Graffiti Research Lab. Jorge Rodriguez Gerada's murals are arguably more beautiful and gain more meaning as they decay and planned destruction, as you witnessed through the 337 project, has proven to be a hit here in SLC (note that many cities do projects like 337 all of the time...It's good to know SLC is finally catching up with these types of exercises).

However, I think you missed my point!!!!! I want to explain myself more clearly and with a better though-out statement instead of my usual bloggggarble. I'm going to address certain points you brought up in argument form so that I can keep my thoughts organized ok? I'm not trying to sound lame I just want to clarify what I meant. You are a good writer so I'm kinda using some of the statements you made to conjure up a coherent structure for my statements ok? Here goes nothing:

Although the decay of art is sometimes the whole point, the purposeful destruction or loss of culture and history is absolutely something worth mourning. The point of my comments on such a loss were that if another country decided to take out NYC and the MOMA, MET, Goog, etc. they would be destroying not only us but themselves as well (how stupid!). Would we artists move on? Yes... but a loss like that would suck for the whole world represented in these collections. Other cultures outside of the struggle would wonder why the aggressor had no respect for their history and art that was preserved in these institutions. Not only paintings would be lost but living archives of cultures! We aren't talking just expendable paintings here. We are talking historical evidence... learning. Sometimes these old paintings, sculpture, architecture, clothing, manuscripts, poetry, whatever, is all we have left of ancient civilizations, religions, cultures, you name it. So no, I am not referring to an extension of oneself here or art in any selfish term at all (legacy, self, immortality) I'm referring to the representation of entire cultures through history. The idea of a culture loosing parts of it's tangible history because of another culture's conflicts makes me nauseous.

Also, although we have made great advances in artificial (data) archival, I'm not satisfied with mere technological representation and archival of art. I want the real deal! Even with our technology today, a picture or scan of a tapestry will always be second to the magic of the original piece. Holding one of the sections of Japanese armor in your hand, feeling it's texture and it's weight, smelling the old leather, and hearing the sounds of the beads knocking each other about can never be portrayed in video or photographs, you know? Art is about experience far past the basic visual or audio elements we can currently archive.

So, that's all I was trying to say. I appreciate your comment though because it is true, as artists of all kinds (literature and music for you, visual, and music for me) we can't expect our art to live forever and would be fools to expect it to! All forms of art will eventually fade (except the Sphinx apparently because new studies show that they think is like from 10,500 BC instead of the previously though 5,000BC. AMAZING!)or at least be lost in translation. I'd just rather it decay on it's own and not through war. That's all.

WOO art. Yes please go to New York City but don't be dumb like me... spend a whole summer there because you could spend like 2 whole days alone at the MET and still be begging for more. Did you know they have a live orchestra that plays from the entrance balcony every single afternoon for visitors who are coming and going? It's just breathtaking and the best part is that ANYONE can experience it. The ticket prices are only suggested donations so even the poorest of the poor are granted access to the education within it's walls! yay!

10:42 PM  
Blogger Esther said...

Haha was it you that told me they had an obsession with Ancient Egypt? I agree that it would be a loss for the whole world if any museum holding classic pieces of art was bombed, but for a different reason. I don't agree that the originals are any better than the representations. I went to the UMFA this week for the first time since I've lived in SLC, sadly, and walked around their collection. I wanted to touch EVERYTHING. They have all this antique furniture, this leather chair from like 16th century Spain, and broken busts, and old canvas paintings that were cracked...but I wasn't allowed to touch anything. They even had Samurai armor--in a glass case. Sure, I got to LOOK at the art in person, but as I walked around, I almost wished I was seeing it in a book. At least that way I'd be able to touch the pages. I've also heard (have not yet experienced it myself) that in big museums you can't even approach the art! You have to stand at a distance and look at it through glass shields! I understand that if these pieces weren't protected, they wouldn't last as long, but if only a select few get to truly experience them until they decay, what is the worth of original works to the rest of us? Perhaps I am too childish and primitive to fully appreciate art in a gallery setting.

I believe that the idea is what we must protect. As Plato would say, that is the only truth. Even the physical work is a representation of an idea, separating it from the original. History and culture don't need material evidence, the ideas are with us now and will always be.
So, losing art to war is a tragedy only because it is an innocent bystander.

Or is it...

2:51 AM  
Blogger Chelsea said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

3:29 PM  
Blogger Slick Jimmy said...

I hope you’ll pardon my intrusion on your discussion, but I would like to interject my thoughts on the matter at hand…

This set of comments is directed in the greater majority toward Ester’s comments and opinions. Let me first say that all things fade and wither as the sands of time dribble into the abyss. From stardust were our corporeal bodies formed, and to stardust we, and all that is, will eventually return. This much is inevitable. But to assert that the preservation of art, in whatever form, is not of paramount importance is folly. Art, music, literature, architecture, and even fashion, and the repositories of said artistic endeavors are invaluable to the learning of the human species, and our evolution as dynamic cultures and societies, both globally and in local environs.

As to your asserted point that reproductions are just as good as originals, beg to differ strenuously. Until you have stood under the expanse of the Sistine Chapel and marveled at the masterwork of Michelangelo, realizing that the entire 5000 square feet of frescoed ceiling was painted upon his back on a scaffold, and he did it as fast as he could over a period of over four years, you can not fully appreciate the work. If you ever have the pleasure to stand there looking up at this wonder, you’ll think…This was Michelangelo as his worst, just trying to finish a job as fast as he could because the Pope forced it upon him. That magnificent ceiling is just his rapid sketching! He considered himself a sculptor. Just looking in a book at these images could never give you the feeling of standing under the those soaring frescos, and walking though the Chapel in pure amazement at the stunning accomplishment he wrought.

And, yes, one day all of it will be gone, but that by no means diminishes what such things can teach succeeding generations until its eventual passing away. We mush cherish and protect these treasures as best we can; however we can. They are precious windows back into history. They speak of time we can never visit, nor experience in any other way. Until the day comes when we can harness the dimension of time, and return and view these creations in their initial formation, they will remain our only link to what has gone before. I feel that you minimize the mastery of the original art, by saying that reproductions are just as viable. Such a statement is ill informed in the extreme.

Again, in the distant future when we have some sort of Star Trek-esque holodeck, where we can create exact facsimiles of objects and even places this might, (and I reiterate might) do to show us the intricacies of certain recorded works, but until that far off time, we are only going to fully experience something by doing just that; Experiencing It. Your youthfully, exuberant myopia is infected with a selfish vision of art. Although a healthy ego (along with a thick skin) is always important to an artist, as an artist’s life tends to beat the hell out a person, it is not self-aggrandizement that persists long into the ages from an artist’s accomplishments; it is the artist’s vision that endures. What he or she saw and felt in that specific time and place, and how and in what medium he or she chose to record this vision.

Every time one of these great works are lost it is a tragedy, even if a reproduction is recorded and logged, for the original vision is lost, and all that remains is an imperfect clone of what flew out the originator’s mind into the world. Imagine the loss of knowledge at the destruction of the Library of Alexandria? What the world lost in those fires? What works of mastery and enlightenment, will never be read or viewed to feed the children of all the tommorows to be. What was lost when the Conquistadors destroyed Aztec, Mayan, and Incan histories, art, culture, and even complete cities in their effort to purge the lands of their religions. What was lost in the utter destruction of the city of Samarkand by Genghis Khan, and the capital of the Khwarezmid Empire was ground to gravel, and all that was left was the piled heads of the dead? When the Parthenon was used as gun power magazine by the Ottomans, and the then it was hit by a Venetian mortar, forever marring the fabulous glory that it once was; what subtle symmetry was erased in a moment, and now we can only partially appreciate? When the Allies firebombed Dresden, said to be on of the most beautiful cities in the world, what will you or I never see because of it, even if there were crystal clear HD footage of it taken before hand?

These are only a few examples of treasures lost or damaged by man’s inhumanity to man. But it is the things that survive that continue to teach us, guide us, enlighten us of what has gone before and of what we yet can be. The cave art at Altamira, Spain, the Venus of Willendorf, hieroglyphics and pictographs of myriad cultures, nomadic trapping of tribes and people long gone, but yet their art and creations endure, and we can see a sliver into their long passed lives through them. Every generation will create such works, and every generation after them will learn from what survives to remain.

You spoke of the washing away of the old as an opportunity to fill a blank canvas, but such destructions only leave vacuums of creative endeavor within art, because the Art of History inspires the Art of the Future to even greater heights. Without it, we have to relearn all that has gone before, picking though the rumble of the desolation to find what scraps are left to teach us. If you don’t believe me, look to the fall of the Roman Empire when so many techniques, both in the arts and sciences were lost, and which had to slowly be rediscovered. If New York were wiped off the map, what would be lost? The cost is incalculable, not only in wealth, people, culture, and art, but also in all the other intangibles what New York offers to all who enter her confines. Now think of the destruction and dissolution of the United States of America itself? What would we loose then? How much time would it take to regain what we have learned and built?

I have to say at last, that war is sometimes necessary, sadly. War is terrible, but in times of war humanity has also shown some of its greatest creativity and innovation, leaping forward in technology in our striving to kill each other. It is the strange, melancholy paradox of war. Yes, out of destruction of the old comes creation of the new, but at what cost in the gems of the human mind that can never be replaced or regained?

4:07 PM  
Blogger Esther said...

Oh my, did I just get it handed to me? haha Good thing I have thick skin to protect my healthy ego, eh? Obviously I am nowhere near your level of education in visual art. I've never taken an art class outside of drawing 101 in high school, and only know of a few of the art references you made, Slick Jimmy. Like I said in my comment, it is tragic when art is lost, but to what extent? I agree that looking at art in person is an entirely different experience than looking at photographs...but how many people get that experience? How many people can afford to visit the Sistine Chapel? Or travel to New York and go to the museums there? I've wanted to go to NYC since I was in third grade and have never had the money, and I'm considered upper middle-class! Representations are all that most of us get to experience, so of what use are the originals except to create the representations and inspire the few that can experience them? Can a representation not inspire and influence to the same extent as the original if you don't know any better? The actual physical work of art is only a representation of the "vision" or idea, anyway. You make it sound as if I said art isn't important, but that's far from my point. I've spent most of my academic career aspiring to be an artist through words. Why in the world would I waste my time if I didn't think it was important? From what I know, literature has been the catalyst in a number of important events throughout history. I just don't believe the loss of original artwork is such a terrible tragedy as was stated, unless it hasn't been recorded. Perhaps I am too nearsighted to get the full picture of what we lose when original art is destroyed...but I would rather mourn the loss of an idea than the material, and once recorded, ideas are somewhat difficult to lose. But what do I know? I seem to get carried away in my ill informed youthful exuberance ;)

7:47 PM  
Blogger Chelsea said...

well now that was twice you put your self down on my blog E! No self put-downs! You are entitled to opinions weather or not you have extensive experience like J in visual arts.. someone will always be there to argue an opinion, especially when it comes to something like this- discussing the worth of someone or a group of people's life work. Some could say who are we to even have this discussion? This art doesn't even belong to us so we can't control it's fate anyway? lol
Anyway, arguments shouldn't cause you to put yourself down. I am so glad this comment string was started because I, myself, learned a lot about both art and how lay-people think about it.

On the part where you don't think you could save up money to go to NYC- Lucky for us many of the museums have traveling exhibits!(oh and PS> I could actually touch a lot of the art at the MET- all museums are different. Some exhibits that I saw at the MET might be in Utah before we know it so at least you will be able to experience those if you want to. Plus, as you know, we have so much fun contemporary art in SLC! (I actually thought gallery stroll was last night and got all ready to go in the cold only to find out I was wrong. bummmer haha) Anyway don't give up posting!

10:43 AM  
Blogger Esther said...

Haha Thanks Chelsea, but I wasn't putting myself down. Your friend "J" put down some nicely worded insults for me, so I thought I'd have a little fun with them.

You make a good point about traveling exhibits and the local art here in SLC. There is much to experience without buying a plane ticket.

Don't tell anyone, but I touched that Spanish arm chair when no one was looking :P

2:18 PM  
Blogger Slick Jimmy said...

Esther,

My apologies in the late reply. My work has taken precedence, ah, but such is life.

I will endeavor to respond to your posed queries as best as the meager stroking on my keyboard can allow. Aside from flagrant sarcasm cast back at me from my previous post, I feel that you articulated yourself well, and yet I still differ with you on your initial fundamental premise.

However, be that as it may, you threw out a few questions that I think have some fair validity for rejoinder.

Firstly, you asked-

It is tragic when art is lost, but to what extent?

That is subjective. If it is one of my amateurish sketches, the loss is negligible, but if it were say the Louvre that was burned to the ground or whatever, the loss would be astronomical.

Next, you asked-

"I agree that looking at art in person is an entirely different experience than looking at photographs...but how many people get that experience?"

Millions upon millions every day around the world in museums, galleries, universities, and even in private collections in homes. Art is everywhere. I'm sure that you can find a place near you to appreciate art. Often national and international exhibits travel to cities across the world to share such artistic masterpieces. You just have to look for them to enjoy.

Next you asked-

"How many people can afford to visit the Sistine Chapel?"

Again, millions upon millions every year visit the Vatican, rich to poor, and everywhere in between. Why not you? As an upper middle class American, you are among some of the richest people per capita in the world. With a little fiscal discipline and patience you to can visit anywhere on the globe. Didn't you realize that? You don't HAVE to stay in your mountain west microcosm. There's a whole big ol' world out there just waiting for you to see and experience it, girl.

And the addendum to that question of yours...

"(How many people can afford to) travel to New York and go to the museums there?"

And yet again, millions upon, millions, upon millions... day after day, month after month, year after year... Crazy, huh? Where do they find the time and money? By the way, if you look you can find airfare to New York, often as low as under 200 buck-a-roos. Check out Travelocity sometime. But maybe you are you living hand to mouth in your upper middle class perch, or are you just living complacently in your comfort zone?

And now to your next duo of interrogatives...Part 1.

"Representations are all that most of us get to experience, so of what use are the originals except to create the representations and inspire the few that can experience them? "

To this first part, I refer you back to my previous post for a review of the material presented there. As the sage said, repetition is the mother of learning.

And...Part 2.

"Can a representation not inspire and influence to the same extent as the original if you don't know any better?"

To the second part, yes, a representation can teach in part, but, no, a representation cannot teach as completely as the original. The appreciation of and education from a painting or architecture, or sculpture, or any number of artistic media from out of the pages of of a book, no matter how well printed is a poor facsimile in the extreme of the original. It's like looking at the 1 inch thumbnail at 72 dpi which you click on to see the full sized 20 foot jpeg at 600 dpi, and saying,( and I don't mean to put words in your mouth but-}

"Yeah, I really get what the artist was going for here. No, I don't need the see the vastly larger, infinitely more detailed version. Thanks."

Then you stated at further-

"You make it sound as if I said art isn't important..."

No, I said you minimize such art by saying that the original masterworks are not as important as the recorded "ideas." Our level of recording said works yet lacks the texture; the feel of the originals, to give validity and credence to such an assertion.

And even further you stated-

"I've spent most of my academic career aspiring to be an artist through words."

In a day and age when text can be fairly reproduced so easily, and disseminated to the world, I can see your point as too the art and ideas presented in writing, that the original manuscript is not as important as the vast number of copies. But what if that manuscript was painstakingly written by hand in masterful calligraphy, and filled with original illustrations. Wouldn't this piece of "art" be more precious than, say, some excellent copy, even when said copy was signed by the author? Or would you rather the idea of this work be kept in digital form while all the hard copies were burned along with the original. Such hypotheticals are the extrapolation of your argument.

Then you asked-

"Why in the world would I waste my time if I didn't think it was important?"

Why would you? It is a good question. One best answered by oneself. Here's a great literary line from a great literary and philosophical mind (and I paraphrase.)

The only wisdom is to know that you know nothing.

Onward you went-

"From what I know, literature has been the catalyst in a number of important events throughout history."

I beg to politely differ. People were the catalysts, and the ideas of art, science, politics, stories, and all other fields of endeavors that sprang from their minds when penned down in a written record, then that literature is just the snippet remembrance of a person's thoughts; a poor facsimile for the person.

But we have a picture of the person, right? So we know them, and all they thought and felt. I just can see it all in the eyes of that faded lithograph of my great grandfather. Here, here's a picture of my long lost relative. I want you to meet him.

Do you see the difference?

To conclude, you stated-

"I just don't believe the loss of original artwork is such a terrible tragedy as was stated, unless it hasn't been recorded...but I would rather mourn the loss of an idea than the material, and once recorded, ideas are somewhat difficult to lose."

It is your right to think whatever you want. I just hope you back up all your hard drives, and never have a disaster happen to all your writing, say your house burns down. Because you know Murphy loves to mess with all of us.

Have a fabulous day, and pen something just super-duper, 'kay?

Sardonically Yours In Creative Writing,
Slick Jimmy

12:03 PM  
Blogger Esther said...

Slick Jimmy,

This is my last post concerning this blog. It's been highly entertaining, but we could keep going back and forth for ages and I don't have that kind of attention span, which is perhaps why I can't appreciate art in the way you do.

I'm going to write this sans feigned eloquence and go directly to my rebuttals.

1. In answer to my question "It is tragic when art is lost, but to what extent?" you replied, "That is subjective."

-Exactly.

2. Answering my question "I agree that looking at art in person is an entirely different experience than looking at photographs...but how many people get that experience?" you replied "Millions upon millions every day around the world..."

-Obviously we are ALL exposed to original art nearly every day. Graffiti on the street, photographs in our homes, store front displays, etc. Those of us motivated enough can visit local art shows or traveling exhibits, if we're lucky enough to live in a place that has them. So really, you should have said billions and billions of people get to experience art.

3. Your answer to my question "How many people can afford to visit the Sistine Chapel?" was "Again, millions upon millions every year visit the Vatican, rich to poor, and everywhere in between. Why not you?"

-I guess your work has also been keeping you from hearing about our current economic predicament. Hopefully this doesn't frighten you, but due to irresponsibility on the part of our financial leaders, and Americans' bad habit of living beyond their means, this country is in some serious trouble. Too bad the neighbors maxed their credit card out so they could go on an art tour of Europe and had to get a second mortgage on their house they couldn't afford. They're fucked now. I'm sure that millions of people get to experience these true masterpieces you speak of...on their credit cards. I don't know many people in that 5% category in this nation that could afford to go otherwise. The money that I save all gets handed over to the university I go to so I can converse with you now without sounding like a hillbilly. Not only can most people not afford to travel without ringing up debt, but they can't afford to take time off from their jobs. Do you know how many people live paycheck to paycheck? Unfortunately, most of us. Plus, you've gotta have a really nice job, or have spent a really long time there to get the kind of benefits that would allow a reasonable vacation. Also, you assumed I'm an American and am free to travel outside of the country. English is my second language...curious, huh?

4. To my question "(How many people can afford to) travel to New York and go to the museums there?" and "Representations are all that most of us get to experience, so of what use are the originals except to create the representations and inspire the few that can experience them?" you replied "And yet again, millions upon, millions, upon millions... day after day, month after month, year after year... Crazy, huh? Where do they find the time and money?"

-"I refer you back to my previous post for a review of the material presented there. As the sage said, repetition is the mother of learning."

I'm going to skip a few of your comments about representations, because I've already stated my opinion on them and feel I can get just as much out of a print than I can the real deal, if not more.

5. To my statement “From what I know, literature has been the catalyst in a number of important events throughout history." you replied “I beg to politely differ. People were the catalysts, and the ideas of art, science, politics, stories, and all other fields of endeavors that sprang from their minds when penned down in a written record, then that literature is just the snippet remembrance of a person's thoughts; a poor facsimile for the person.”

-I think if I just typed “The Declaration of Independence” it would suffice, however, I happen to agree with you here on one part. The Declaration of Independence didn’t change the world because of its vocabulary and syntax, the ideas presented in it, and the people that realized them did. And once again, the ideas are what matter, not the physical work.

Onward you went-

“But we have a picture of the person, right? So we know them, and all they thought and felt. I just can see it all in the eyes of that faded lithograph of my great grandfather. Here, here's a picture of my long lost relative. I want you to meet him.”

-Basically what you’re saying (and I don’t want to put words in your mouth but) “Yeah, sure I can read these adjectives and adverbs, but no, I can’t really visualize anything unless there’s an actual picture included. Where do you keep your picture books?”

6. In response to my conclusion, you said “I just hope you back up all your hard drives, and never have a disaster happen to all your writing, say your house burns down.”

-Thank rational thought that the internet was invented, right? Otherwise we wouldn’t be having this exciting discourse and if my computer crashed and my house burned down (do you know where I live?) all my super-duper work would be lost! And if the Internet one day fails me, well it’s a good thing I have a mind that (time forbid) will produce an endless supply of ideas. Relying on the physical is such dangerous business.

Verbally Yours In This Blog,
Esther


'Kay I'm done!

6:27 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home