By Louis Tutwaller
I wonder why there's no clouds up in the closet I looked for my favorite shoo fly! Don't bother me with a bunch of carrots and paisleys that look like hairy little parameci - um, could you repeat that last parting your hair in the middle is a sign of rebellions, tomatoes and hold the may. . . yo - -yo string is all tied in Knots Berry Farm used to be a simpler kind of life when folks would just go to the park and listen to music played by trombones and Sue's got a new phone in if you know the answer to our trivia question: How many steps would the average millipede take to walk around the Earth and back again so soon?
Thursday, July 12, 2007
Wednesday, July 11, 2007
More wisdom from Mr Tutwaller
Tuesday, July 10, 2007
Wise Words from Mr Tutwaller
Thursday, June 28, 2007
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
racketship
Here is a doodle by Vann3, which reminds me of an M.C. Escher drawing, where there are multiple vanishing points. When I asked the artist about the meaning of the title ("racketship"), he indicated that the title did not have any correlation to the drawing. However, even before Vann3 had replied to my query, the bottom half of the drawing reminded me both of a top view of a waterfall and the thrust of a three-engined rocket ship blasting off. Whatever the case, I enjoy the dynamic and disconcerting perspective all in one drawing.By the way, here is a great website for M.C. Escher:
http://www.mcescher.com GALLERIES
Tuesday, March 6, 2007
Happy Anniversary

March 6, 1980 - September 20, 2003
Here is another example of a drawing with arms that are much too long. [Ref the post "Comic Gone Awry", December 3, 2006] No one has arms that long, except a Gibbon! So, a drawing that has some real pathos is made ridiculous because the artist didn't notice that the arms are extended beyond physical reality. Or, did the artist intend to convey that he was reaching for that which was lost and therefore unatainable? No, I don't think that can be chalked-up to a retro-active Freudian "save" due to some subconscious deeper meaning. The artist simply got sloppy and wasn't watching what was right before his eyes. How could he have missed then what is so obvious now?
Monday, January 15, 2007
Strolling Through Modern Art
This particular drawing came to mind while I was looking at the Art Institute of Chicago's website and I came across some artwork by Joan Miro, who is exhibited at AIC. Vee Mack's drawings generally demonstrate better draughtsmanship than this drawing displays but I thought that the concept was amusing and the implied commentary worth considering. Are you a fan of Joan Miro, Piet Mondrian, Paul Klee, Jackson Pollock, Willem De Kooning and Vasily Kandinsky?What does this elderly gentleman think of his stroll through the paramecium of the artworld? Francis Schaeffer noted in "The God Who is There" that Paul Klee and similar artists, introduced the idea of artwork generated in a manner similar to how a Ouija Board generates words from outside the artist's conscious intent. Schaeffer observed that Klee "hopes that somehow art will find a meaning, not because there is a spirit there to guide the hand, but because through it the universe will speak even though it is impersonal in its basic structure." [page 90] Why would an impersonal universe have something to say? What does meaninglessness have to communicate? Schaeffer explains that "these men will not accept the only explanation which can fit the facts of their own experience, they have become metaphysical magicians. No one has presented an idea, let alone demonstrated it to be feasible, to explain how the impersonal beginning, plus time, plus chance, can give personality . . . As a result, either the thinker must say man is dead, because personality is a mirage; or else he must hang his reason on a hook outside the door and cross the threshold into the leap of faith which is the new level of despair." [page 115]
Vee Mack's sketch demonstrates the paradox of an average man viewing images, which represent the nonsense of Dadaism and chaos. It is the overeducated who will look at something that is inherently meaningless and try to find deep meaning in it, while the average man sees it and observes with reasonable common sense that this or that is an absurd waste of time.
By the way, while it may appear as though I am favoring one artist for these posts, I am not receiving the variety of artwork that I had hoped for from other artists and I happen to have ample access to much of Vee Mack's unpublished portfolio. Therefore, until I receive other artwork, I will have to rely on what I have on hand.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
