Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
[IBC] Maybe we should ask a different question.
Friends,
Finally, a topic in which i feel i can contribute. I have a lack of experience in the world of bonsai, admittedly. However, although experience relates to knowledge, it is not prerequisite. Or perhaps it is, but then may one say that hour upon hour of absorbing information is not experience? Different maybe than 45 years of growing bonsai, true, but we do not speak of who can cultivate the best bonsai in this case, rather is that, or is that not, "art." Several things have prompted me to write. There are people stepping on the toes of others, where there feet may need more guidance. This is, of course, only my opinion, however I am both knowledgeable and experienced in art. One is not a necessity or precursor to the other and should not be confused. I am a sculptor, a printmaker, a painter and a draftsman. "Classically trained" is completely superfluous, arbitrary, and and therefore meaningless. The idea of "classical art," i contend, is a falsehood. This is based solely on the relative and subjective nature of art, and it's interpretation. Objective determinations, such as "this is art" and "this is not" cannot then truly exsist. Personally, i believe that there is no such thing as a true objectivity, but you can personally email me for a debate on that, i'd love to entertain mentally stimulating conversation. "How can the classics be subjective and relative? I thought they were classics?" How did you come to the conclusion they were classics? If you feel they are, then maybe they are. However many people never stop to consider this fact. Do you feel that way because you've read in a book that they are? most likely yes. how do i know this? how many people have been to see the mona lisa in person, without prior knowledge of it's exsistence, then came to the determination that, of all works of art created, for the mona lisa's intent, agenda, process and execution, among all others, it is or should be therefore deemed, a classic? My guess, not many. Therefore that leaves most people to fall under the category of those of us who believe that because we are told something it is true, we accept it as such. does this mean that it really is? no, not neccesarily. who is to say? art is too subjective and relative to exsist as such. "so then who is right? how do we know who to believe? are there then no classics?" addressing those questions actually isn't fruitful. if you would like me to address them, email me personally, and again, i would be happy to. i feel the real question people should be asking, is never asked "What do i think, and does what other people say matter to me enough to forsake my own independent thought, and its value or worth?" Not enough people ask this question. I believe herein lies the problem. People read things and believe them. they think that because a man has a phd in say, art history, his opinion matters more. does it? because one man says that something is a classic, is it? or maybe more people are needed? 10? 100? 1,000? The Nazi's (used only as an example, i hope we can steer clear of debate about WWII) all got together. many millions saying the same thing? were they right? My opinion is that they were not. I therefore ask, who is to say who's opinion is right or wrong? "then what is there left to discuss?" Well, the interpretation of what is and is not art is still left specifically unaddressed, so i will now, based upon things i have mentioned, attempt to address it. The short answer is "no one is right, no one is wrong." Spineless? if you think so, so be it. I'm convinced that it is the product of years of thought and experience, and a truly open mind. if that's spineless, or perhaps non-confrontational to you, there's not much i can say that i have not already, and i'm sorry. for the rest of us who think that art is truly subjective and relative, how do we deal with these questions? well, as these questions look for objectivity where i maintain none is to be found, i propose then that they are as such futile to ask. art therefore becomes a personal thing of opinion. where then do i propose this debate go? If i have picked up a paintbrush for the first time, and i am 6, is the scribble work i create not art? to who? i certainly would feel it is. i'm 6. yes, i lack experience, knowledge, and skill, but does that mean this is any less valuable to me? in my world and reality, who's opinion matters? why do we lose sight of this as we grow older? perhaps that's a little bit of a stretch. a better example: I have been watercolor painting for 15 years. my landscapes will never be "museum worthy" or "gallery worthy," does it therefore have less meaning to me? is it of less worth or value? i would say not. what is this discussion about then? about the worth of something, about something's value. drawing perhaps a general destinction between types of art would be the most fruitful thing for this debate to discuss. I draw art into 2 general categories. i say general, because there cannot be any clear definitions in art i feel, and as such, i only make general ones for the sake of an attempt at clarification of thought. The first category is "low art." i'm sure many of you understand this concept at least partially, but let me clarify one or two things for the sake of being thorough. My designations do not, as i will shortly explain, determine worth. I would loosely group artworks that do not or will never enter an exhibition of any kind (gallery, museum, whatever). these would include people who create art as a "hobby" perhaps, non-proffessionals, and the like. again, this does not mean it is worth any less than "high art." for a better application to this argument, this would include part-time hobby bonsaiists. people who do bonsai for fun, or are serious, but would not be generally considered masters. this does not mean it is worth any less than a master's work. what price or value would you put on your first succesful jin? What is that first successful jin worth, with all that you learned, and the feeling you get when you do something right after so many failed attempts? "high art" is the other grouping i would loosely make. this includes all proffessional artists, whose work is produced as a means of income, or for the purpose of appearing in an exhibition, gallery, museum or otherwise. also a love for making art and creativity, etc. is included but becomes one of many primary goals beyond "low art" though not neccesarily disparate. is this worth more because a general audience say it is? i have made works that many have not deemed "successful," but personally speaking, with an understanding of the worth of what i have accomplished, i would not trade that work or its experience for a so-called "classic" that i would have perhaps not gotten anything out of. i feel then that no one, save the beholder or the artist decide for themselves what they deem to be the "wort" of something, with the understanding that it does not and can never actually describe that thing's true worth. this is where i feel the debate goes astray. people are having difficulty drawing a distinction between low and high art, and whether or not these distinctions therefore attatch work. this is another area where people step on toes. a "master" displays his tree. he feels it is beautiful, and a masterful creation, a display of his experience and skill. I think it's an ugly tree. who is truly right? his skill is better than mine, his experience is unmatched, etc. etc. it may technically be a better tree than anything i could ever hope to accomplish, but because he says it is beautiful, and others agree, does that make it so? does this then determine it's worth? you display an "ugly" tree. you successfully create a jin. everyone else says it's ugly. is it ugly to you? what worth do you assign to that tree, and what it means? what does the worth that other people assign to your work mean to you? i feel that's what is at the heart of this debate. people mix and mash terms when they should perhaps use them more delicately. what is and what is art should be left to the individual. what is a good bonsai and what is not a good bonsai should be left to the individual. none are better than others. Please keep in mind that these are my opinions and do not reflect those of other "artists," "bonsaiists," or anything else that i may be grouped as. People mistakenly neglect to add a disclaimer and now i have as a member of a group they also fit in, have been cast in a manner other than what is the actual case. please take my opinions, and everyone else's with a grain of salt. please feel free to contact me personally if you would like to continue to debate specific topics. i hope that i may have in some way helped to maintain the debate/discussion, and perhaps add to it. Keep an open mind. Justin Diaz "Youth is Wasted on the Young." Richmond, VA by way of Allentown, PA ************************************************** ****************************** ++++Sponsored, in part, by Lisa Kanis++++ ************************************************** ****************************** -- The IBC HOME PAGE & FAQ: http://www.internetbonsaiclub.org/ -- +++++ Questions? Help? e-mail +++++ |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
[IBC] Maybe we should ask a different question.
Justin,
Your dissertation was, I'm afraid, a complete denial of human understanding, human nature and clearly illustrates the dangers of relativism and drunken subjectivism. Your thesis regarding objectivity (and your erroneous conclusions) describe your apparent misunderstanding of human nature and the workings of the mind. Yours was not so much a contribution to the art debate as it was an attempt to argue that no one knows what he/she is talking about, so we should all just shut up. Let me take issue with the many falsehoods you presented: --------------- "Classically trained" is completely superfluous, arbitrary, and and therefore meaningless. --------------- Absolutely wrong. If you understand the basic common process, syllabus and elements of classical training (in any number of arts), you can clearly see what is meant by "classically trained" and know that it is neither superfluous nor meaningless. That you don't understand this is lamentable, but is not evidence of non-existence. --------------- The idea of "classical art," i contend, is a falsehood. This is based solely on the relative and subjective nature of art, and it's interpretation. Objective determinations, such as "this is art" and "this is not" cannot then truly exsist. Personally, i believe that there is no such thing as a true objectivity, but you can personally email me for a debate on that, i'd love to entertain mentally stimulating conversation. ---------------- Your ridiculous argument that there is no such thing as objectivity leaves us without any means to classify or define anything. Definitions and classifications are important tools for us, our perception and our functioning intellect. We humans *have* to define and classify, lest every new thing we encounter is a complete surprise and then occupies its own, unique place in our perception, exclusive of any other things that are similar in nature. This is not how humans function and it is ridiculous to suggest that it is or should be. ----------------- snip i feel the real question people should be asking, is never asked "What do i think, and does what other people say matter to me enough to forsake my own independent thought, and its value or worth?" ----------------- Opinion does not exist in a vacuum. What you describe as "the" way to classify things is utter anarchy and denies the fact that we calssify things based on pertinent information. If I think that the sky is pink, because in my mind blue is the same as pink, I have opted out of common human perception and societal structures. Mine would be a worthless idea and have no contribution to our world. Like everying else, art is classified by its widely agreed upon features. Like everything else, there is room for individual interpretation, but there are core concepts and features that make art "art." Your sad attempt to suggest that everything is an arbitrary, worthless determination is naive and denies this simple fact. Art is communication and all art pulls to some degree from the pool of features and elements that we have determined (and that thousands of years of human history supports) to be characteristic of art. That you don't understand this is, again, lamentable, but simply not evidence to the contrary. ---------------- People read things and believe them. they think that because a man has a phd in say, art history, his opinion matters more. does it? because one man says that something is a classic, is it? or maybe more people are needed? 10? 100? 1,000? The Nazi's (used only as an example, i hope we can steer clear of debate about WWII) all got together. many millions saying the same thing? were they right? My opinion is that they were not. I therefore ask, who is to say who's opinion is right or wrong? ---------------- Here you have used a contemptable ploy to support what you cannot support any other way, I guess. This is inflamatory and irrelevant. ---------------- Well, the interpretation of what is and is not art is still left specifically unaddressed, so i will now, based upon things i have mentioned, attempt to address it. The short answer is "no one is right, no one is wrong." Spineless? ---------------- Absolutley. Not just spineless, but erroneous and specious. ---------------- this is where i feel the debate goes astray. people are having difficulty drawing a distinction between low and high art, and whether or not these distinctions therefore attatch work. this is another area where people step on toes. ---------------- Your again ridiculous, arbitrary classifications (not listed above for the sake of brevity) ignore what we humans have already arrived at by way of classifying art. The aim is not the determining factor. Rather the quality - the degree to which the work communicates within the already established artistic language norms and its resultant success with viewers (how it communicates directly to each or groups of viewers/listeners). Again, you have completely disregarded how humans appreciate art and how art is meaningful to humans. You have constructed a thesis based on your own lack of understanding and have used it as an (empty) illustration of how things should be or how you believe they are. In this process you have denied what has come before you and ignored what is clearly evident to most intelligent people. Your attempt to deny the value of societal structures, concrete and conceptualized ideals, logical arbitrary classification and the depth of history upon which we have built these valuable elements of our lives is both naive and dangerous. There are further implications and dangers inherent in your thesis that are not appropriate for this forum, but there nonetheless. Keep an open mind. Justin Diaz ------------------- Justin, you have opened your mind so wide that your brain has fallen out. A lesson to us all. Further, I note that you preface every opinion of yours by saying "i feel that..." I should think you should do much more "thinking" and much less "feeling" in your personal examinations of what "is" in human society. In the end, we are left with the very real and very valuable, widely acknowledged characteristics of art and intelligent people can understand that inventing our own, individual, "languages" for art is in no way valuable as it would then have no social or widespread value. I am thankful that we don't live in the anarchist and non-cohesive world you have suggested here. Kind regards, Andy Rutledge zone 8, Texas ************************************************** ****************************** ++++Sponsored, in part, by Lisa Kanis++++ ************************************************** ****************************** -- The IBC HOME PAGE & FAQ: http://www.internetbonsaiclub.org/ -- +++++ Questions? Help? e-mail +++++ |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
[IBC] Maybe we should ask a different question.
Andy: You've been watching too much Fox news and its ilk. It's not that your ideas
are bad; I agree with many of them, but the unblunted hostility in which you express them are rude and intimidating. I have no problem with you taking a strong stand on an opinion. Just try to show a modicum of respect for those who might believe otherwise. And try to lighten up on the absolutes and overgeneralizations. The real world is not so black and white. Alan Walker, Lake Charles, LA, USA http://LCBSBonsai.org http://bonsai-bci.com ================================== Andy Rutledge wrote: Justin, Your dissertation was, I'm afraid, a complete denial of human understanding, human nature and clearly illustrates the dangers of relativism and drunken subjectivism. SNIP Absolutely wrong. SNIP Your ridiculous argument SNIP This is not how humans function and it is ridiculous to suggest that it is or should be. SNIP Your sad attempt to suggest that everything is an arbitrary, worthless determination is naive and denies this simple fact. SNIP SNIP Here you have used a contemptible ploy to support what you cannot support any other way, I guess. This is inflammatory and irrelevant ..SNIP Your again ridiculous, arbitrary classifications (not listed above for the sake of brevity) ignore what we humans have already arrived at by way of classifying art. SNIP Again, you have completely disregarded how humans appreciate art and how art is meaningful to humans. You have constructed a thesis based on your own lack of understanding and have used it as an (empty) illustration of how things should be or how you believe they are. In this process you have denied what has come before you and ignored what is clearly evident to most intelligent people. Your attempt to deny the value of societal structures, concrete and conceptualized ideals, logical arbitrary classification and the depth of history upon which we have built these valuable elements of our lives is both naive and dangerous. There are further implications and dangers inherent in your thesis that are not appropriate for this forum, but there nonetheless. Keep an open mind. Justin Diaz ------------------- Justin, you have opened your mind so wide that your brain has fallen out. SNIP ************************************************** ****************************** ++++Sponsored, in part, by Lisa Kanis++++ ************************************************** ****************************** -- The IBC HOME PAGE & FAQ: http://www.internetbonsaiclub.org/ -- +++++ Questions? Help? e-mail +++++ |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
[IBC] Maybe we should ask a different question.
Put your rain boots on folks. They are good for this to.
----- Original Message ----- From: "Andy Rutledge" To: Sent: Monday, October 13, 2003 8:16 AM Subject: [IBC] Maybe we should ask a different question. Justin, Your dissertation was, I'm afraid, a complete denial of human understanding, human nature and clearly illustrates the dangers of relativism and drunken subjectivism. Your thesis regarding objectivity (and your erroneous conclusions) describe your apparent misunderstanding of human nature and the workings of the mind. Yours was not so much a contribution to the art debate as it was an attempt to argue that no one knows what he/she is talking about, so we should all just shut up. Let me take issue with the many falsehoods you presented: --------------- "Classically trained" is completely superfluous, arbitrary, and and therefore meaningless. --------------- Absolutely wrong. If you understand the basic common process, syllabus and elements of classical training (in any number of arts), you can clearly see what is meant by "classically trained" and know that it is neither superfluous nor meaningless. That you don't understand this is lamentable, but is not evidence of non-existence. --------------- The idea of "classical art," i contend, is a falsehood. This is based solely on the relative and subjective nature of art, and it's interpretation. Objective determinations, such as "this is art" and "this is not" cannot then truly exsist. Personally, i believe that there is no such thing as a true objectivity, but you can personally email me for a debate on that, i'd love to entertain mentally stimulating conversation. ---------------- Your ridiculous argument that there is no such thing as objectivity leaves us without any means to classify or define anything. Definitions and classifications are important tools for us, our perception and our functioning intellect. We humans *have* to define and classify, lest every new thing we encounter is a complete surprise and then occupies its own, unique place in our perception, exclusive of any other things that are similar in nature. This is not how humans function and it is ridiculous to suggest that it is or should be. ----------------- snip i feel the real question people should be asking, is never asked "What do i think, and does what other people say matter to me enough to forsake my own independent thought, and its value or worth?" ----------------- Opinion does not exist in a vacuum. What you describe as "the" way to classify things is utter anarchy and denies the fact that we calssify things based on pertinent information. If I think that the sky is pink, because in my mind blue is the same as pink, I have opted out of common human perception and societal structures. Mine would be a worthless idea and have no contribution to our world. Like everying else, art is classified by its widely agreed upon features. Like everything else, there is room for individual interpretation, but there are core concepts and features that make art "art." Your sad attempt to suggest that everything is an arbitrary, worthless determination is naive and denies this simple fact. Art is communication and all art pulls to some degree from the pool of features and elements that we have determined (and that thousands of years of human history supports) to be characteristic of art. That you don't understand this is, again, lamentable, but simply not evidence to the contrary. ---------------- People read things and believe them. they think that because a man has a phd in say, art history, his opinion matters more. does it? because one man says that something is a classic, is it? or maybe more people are needed? 10? 100? 1,000? The Nazi's (used only as an example, i hope we can steer clear of debate about WWII) all got together. many millions saying the same thing? were they right? My opinion is that they were not. I therefore ask, who is to say who's opinion is right or wrong? ---------------- Here you have used a contemptable ploy to support what you cannot support any other way, I guess. This is inflamatory and irrelevant. ---------------- Well, the interpretation of what is and is not art is still left specifically unaddressed, so i will now, based upon things i have mentioned, attempt to address it. The short answer is "no one is right, no one is wrong." Spineless? ---------------- Absolutley. Not just spineless, but erroneous and specious. ---------------- this is where i feel the debate goes astray. people are having difficulty drawing a distinction between low and high art, and whether or not these distinctions therefore attatch work. this is another area where people step on toes. ---------------- Your again ridiculous, arbitrary classifications (not listed above for the sake of brevity) ignore what we humans have already arrived at by way of classifying art. The aim is not the determining factor. Rather the quality - the degree to which the work communicates within the already established artistic language norms and its resultant success with viewers (how it communicates directly to each or groups of viewers/listeners). Again, you have completely disregarded how humans appreciate art and how art is meaningful to humans. You have constructed a thesis based on your own lack of understanding and have used it as an (empty) illustration of how things should be or how you believe they are. In this process you have denied what has come before you and ignored what is clearly evident to most intelligent people. Your attempt to deny the value of societal structures, concrete and conceptualized ideals, logical arbitrary classification and the depth of history upon which we have built these valuable elements of our lives is both naive and dangerous. There are further implications and dangers inherent in your thesis that are not appropriate for this forum, but there nonetheless. Keep an open mind. Justin Diaz ------------------- Justin, you have opened your mind so wide that your brain has fallen out. A lesson to us all. Further, I note that you preface every opinion of yours by saying "i feel that..." I should think you should do much more "thinking" and much less "feeling" in your personal examinations of what "is" in human society. In the end, we are left with the very real and very valuable, widely acknowledged characteristics of art and intelligent people can understand that inventing our own, individual, "languages" for art is in no way valuable as it would then have no social or widespread value. I am thankful that we don't live in the anarchist and non-cohesive world you have suggested here. Kind regards, Andy Rutledge zone 8, Texas ************************************************** ************************** **** ++++Sponsored, in part, by Lisa Kanis++++ ************************************************** ************************** **** -- The IBC HOME PAGE & FAQ: http://www.internetbonsaiclub.org/ -- +++++ Questions? Help? e-mail +++++ ************************************************** ****************************** ++++Sponsored, in part, by Lisa Kanis++++ ************************************************** ****************************** -- The IBC HOME PAGE & FAQ: http://www.internetbonsaiclub.org/ -- +++++ Questions? Help? e-mail +++++ |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
[IBC] Maybe we should ask a different question.
Put your rain boots on folks. They are good for this to.
Yes. Maybe we can all forget this version of the "art" thread even started up? Please? Jim Lewis - - Tallahassee, FL -- Bonsai List manager ************************************************** ****************************** ++++Sponsored, in part, by Lisa Kanis++++ ************************************************** ****************************** -- The IBC HOME PAGE & FAQ: http://www.internetbonsaiclub.org/ -- +++++ Questions? Help? e-mail +++++ |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
[IBC] Maybe we should ask a different question.
I would like to apologize for this debate getting as far as it did, and as
away from it's point as it has come. I would however like to say a few things, in respect to the email response that Mr. Rutledge has sent to the list. I clearly stated that any responses of a personal nature should be directed to me personally. so as not to clog the list. I would classify his email as one of a personal nature, and i'm astounded that despite his apparent thourough reading of my email, he seems to have missed that part, or parts, for what reason, i will not here speculate. He will recieve a personal reply to his email, which i greatly appreciate. for all others, i would like to say that although his email was a personal attack on me, i do not take offense to it, as i do have an open mind, contrary to what he submits, and i appreciate a view different than mine without needlessly taking offense to it and resorting to name calling and personal attacks. I genuinely appreciate this differing view, and others like it, and i welcome more of them. However, Please, again i beg you, if you have personal issue with me or my comments, and do not feel the need to belittle others because you disagree with them, email me personally and save everyone else who does not want to hear what perhaps either of us wants to say, and email me personally. To all those whose time has been wasted on fruitless or uninteresting emails (including my own) i apologize, my intent was only to take the discussion further, and to bring a new viewpoint, in hopes of enriching the discussion. Here is my email address again to prevent further clogging of these message boards: My apologies, Justin Diaz ************************************************** ****************************** ++++Sponsored, in part, by Lisa Kanis++++ ************************************************** ****************************** -- The IBC HOME PAGE & FAQ: http://www.internetbonsaiclub.org/ -- +++++ Questions? Help? e-mail +++++ |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
[IBC] Maybe we should ask a different question.
Wow...glad I stayed out of this one! I could see that coming, even from the
cheap seats! It looked a bit too "heavy" for me anyway from the couple I read. but, was wondering.... If I sell all my collection from 25 years, and buy a few all new imported masterpieces... Will I need to defend my "Artistry" ? :) Dale ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alan Walker" Subject: [IBC] Maybe we should ask a different question. Andy: You've been watching too much Fox news and its ilk. It's not that your ideas are bad; I agree with many of them, but the unblunted hostility in which you express them are rude and intimidating. I have no problem with you taking a strong stand on an opinion. Just try to show a modicum of respect for those who might believe otherwise. And try to lighten up on the absolutes and overgeneralizations. The real world is not so black and white. Alan Walker, Lake Charles, LA, USA http://LCBSBonsai.org http://bonsai-bci.com ================================== Andy Rutledge wrote: Justin, Your dissertation was, I'm afraid, a complete denial of human understanding, human nature and clearly illustrates the dangers of relativism and drunken subjectivism. SNIP Absolutely wrong. SNIP Your ridiculous argument SNIP This is not how humans function and it is ridiculous to suggest that it is or should be. SNIP Your sad attempt to suggest that everything is an arbitrary, worthless determination is naive and denies this simple fact. SNIP SNIP Here you have used a contemptible ploy to support what you cannot support any other way, I guess. This is inflammatory and irrelevant .SNIP Your again ridiculous, arbitrary classifications (not listed above for the sake of brevity) ignore what we humans have already arrived at by way of classifying art. SNIP Again, you have completely disregarded how humans appreciate art and how art is meaningful to humans. You have constructed a thesis based on your own lack of understanding and have used it as an (empty) illustration of how things should be or how you believe they are. In this process you have denied what has come before you and ignored what is clearly evident to most intelligent people. Your attempt to deny the value of societal structures, concrete and conceptualized ideals, logical arbitrary classification and the depth of history upon which we have built these valuable elements of our lives is both naive and dangerous. There are further implications and dangers inherent in your thesis that are not appropriate for this forum, but there nonetheless. Keep an open mind. Justin Diaz ------------------- Justin, you have opened your mind so wide that your brain has fallen out. SNIP ************************************************** ****************************** ++++Sponsored, in part, by Lisa Kanis++++ ************************************************** ****************************** -- The IBC HOME PAGE & FAQ: http://www.internetbonsaiclub.org/ -- +++++ Questions? Help? e-mail +++++ |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
[IBC] Maybe we should ask a different question.
Thanks.
Jim Lewis - IBC Moderator "Justin Diaz" wrote in message news:1087.216.164.18.88.1066068446.squirrel@spider mail.richmond.edu... I would like to apologize for this debate getting as far as it did, and as away from it's point as it has come. I would however like to say a few things, in respect to the email response that Mr. Rutledge has sent to the list. I clearly stated that any responses of a personal nature should be directed to me personally. so as not to clog the list. I would classify his email as one of a personal nature, and i'm astounded that despite his apparent thourough reading of my email, he seems to have missed that part, or parts, for what reason, i will not here speculate. He will recieve a personal reply to his email, which i greatly appreciate. for all others, i would like to say that although his email was a personal attack on me, i do not take offense to it, as i do have an open mind, contrary to what he submits, and i appreciate a view different than mine without needlessly taking offense to it and resorting to name calling and personal attacks. I genuinely appreciate this differing view, and others like it, and i welcome more of them. However, Please, again i beg you, if you have personal issue with me or my comments, and do not feel the need to belittle others because you disagree with them, email me personally and save everyone else who does not want to hear what perhaps either of us wants to say, and email me personally. To all those whose time has been wasted on fruitless or uninteresting emails (including my own) i apologize, my intent was only to take the discussion further, and to bring a new viewpoint, in hopes of enriching the discussion. Here is my email address again to prevent further clogging of these message boards: My apologies, Justin Diaz ************************************************** *************** *************** ++++Sponsored, in part, by Lisa Kanis++++ ************************************************** *************** *************** -- The IBC HOME PAGE & FAQ: http://www.internetbonsaiclub.org/ -- +++++ Questions? Help? e-mail +++++ |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
[IBC] Maybe we should ask a different question.
Will I need to defend my "Artistry" ?
Yup. Don't we always? ;-) Jim Lewis - - Tallahassee, FL - REMEMBER: Hit THINK before your hit SEND |
#11
|
|||
|
|||
[IBC] Maybe we should ask a different question.
Justin,
This was about your thesis; the words you put forth, the opinions you put forth - not about you. Deal with it, and without the empty claims of having been personally attacked. Didn't happen. I'm really not sure what was so inappropriate about my post. It was a blunt catalog of the mistakes you made in your post and the flawed concepts behind them, nothing more. If you read any obtuse emotion in to it, it was your mistake, not there on my account. The fact that your post was about as insulting as it gets was beside the point, even if you did wrap your insults in a warm and fuzzy cloak of passive aggressiveness. In spite of your repeated descriptions of my comments are "personal attacks" and being of a "personal nature," I hope that you and others note that but for the comment about your "open mind (which was just an ironic cliché)," every one of my observations had to do with and specifically referenced your flawed opinions and suppositions - not "you." There was nothing personal about my remarks, no matter how much you'd prefer that there were. Again, this was about your thesis; the words you put forth, the opinions you put forth - not about you. So how about you climb down from your martyrdom pyre and address the substance of your remarks and of mine rather than feeling sorry for yourself and trying to garner sympathy for having been called on your errors. Kind regards, Andy Rutledge zone 8, Texas ************************************************** ****************************** ++++Sponsored, in part, by Lisa Kanis++++ ************************************************** ****************************** -- The IBC HOME PAGE & FAQ: http://www.internetbonsaiclub.org/ -- +++++ Questions? Help? e-mail +++++ |
#12
|
|||
|
|||
[IBC] Maybe we should ask a different question.
Alan,
I'm sorry that this seems to be an issue, but you are mistaking plain speak and meaningful words for hostility. The two don't necessarily have anything in common and I was not begin hostile. Rather I was being plain spoken and clear. I made no personal attacks and but one personal observation (about his "open mind" - a humorous cliché). It would be patronizing to try and beat about the bush with words that left anything but clarity in their wake. To be clear, referenced Justin's words, his thesis and his errors - not him. He spouted drivel presented as fact (to us poor imperceptive children who don't understand such complicated matters) and his insults were cleverly cloaked in a non-threatening passive aggressiveness that were made ridiculous by the fact that every point he made was erroneous - and its basis philosophy vacuous. So please try not to read so much emotion in to my post(s). Give me the benefit of the doubt without requiring me to sugar-coat every statement in a bunch of worthless niceties so that no living person could possibly take offense. Kind regards, Andy Rutledge zone 8, Texas ----- Original Message ----- From: "Alan Walker" Andy: You've been watching too much Fox news and its ilk. It's not that your ideas are bad; I agree with many of them, but the unblunted hostility in which you express them are rude and intimidating. I have no problem with you taking a strong stand on an opinion. Just try to show a modicum of respect for those who might believe otherwise. And try to lighten up on the absolutes and overgeneralizations. The real world is not so black and white. Alan Walker ************************************************** ****************************** ++++Sponsored, in part, by Lisa Kanis++++ ************************************************** ****************************** -- The IBC HOME PAGE & FAQ: http://www.internetbonsaiclub.org/ -- +++++ Questions? Help? e-mail +++++ |
#13
|
|||
|
|||
[IBC] Maybe we should ask a different question.
Andy & Jim - enough already! If this is what our IBC has deteriorated to, I
better start looking for a new venue. I will gladly accept the apologies from both of you. MARTY ----- Original Message ----- From: "Andy Rutledge" To: Sent: Monday, October 13, 2003 5:48 PM Subject: [IBC] Maybe we should ask a different question. Justin, This was about your thesis; the words you put forth, the opinions you put forth - not about you. Deal with it, and without the empty claims of having been personally attacked. Didn't happen. I'm really not sure what was so inappropriate about my post. It was a blunt catalog of the mistakes you made in your post and the flawed concepts behind them, nothing more. If you read any obtuse emotion in to it, it was your mistake, not there on my account. The fact that your post was about as insulting as it gets was beside the point, even if you did wrap your insults in a warm and fuzzy cloak of passive aggressiveness. In spite of your repeated descriptions of my comments are "personal attacks" and being of a "personal nature," I hope that you and others note that but for the comment about your "open mind (which was just an ironic cliché)," every one of my observations had to do with and specifically referenced your flawed opinions and suppositions - not "you." There was nothing personal about my remarks, no matter how much you'd prefer that there were. Again, this was about your thesis; the words you put forth, the opinions you put forth - not about you. So how about you climb down from your martyrdom pyre and address the substance of your remarks and of mine rather than feeling sorry for yourself and trying to garner sympathy for having been called on your errors. Kind regards, Andy Rutledge zone 8, Texas ************************************************** ************************** **** ++++Sponsored, in part, by Lisa Kanis++++ ************************************************** ************************** **** -- The IBC HOME PAGE & FAQ: http://www.internetbonsaiclub.org/ -- +++++ Questions? Help? e-mail +++++ ************************************************** ****************************** ++++Sponsored, in part, by Lisa Kanis++++ ************************************************** ****************************** -- The IBC HOME PAGE & FAQ: http://www.internetbonsaiclub.org/ -- +++++ Questions? Help? e-mail +++++ |
#14
|
|||
|
|||
[IBC] Maybe we should ask a different question.
In spite of your repeated descriptions of my comments are "personal attacks" and being of a "personal nature," I hope that you and others note that but for the comment about your "open mind (which was just an ironic cliché)," every one of my observations had to do with and specifically referenced your flawed opinions and suppositions - not "you." There was nothing personal about my remarks, no matter how much you'd prefer that there were. Again, this was about your thesis; the words you put forth, the opinions you put forth - not about you. I don't think I ever posted here, although I do read posts daily. I am not proud that I am breaking my silence by replying to this thread, or egoic chest beating... I was just curious...how can opinions be flawed? And isn't saying "it isn't about you it's about your words..." still the same? Isn't it only natural that Justin would react equally to either an attack on his words or an attack on him? Hasn't this whole undebateable debate eroded to something that belongs on a playground, or at a Senate meeting? Anytime you folks want to start filling my email box with useful information about, I don't...let's say...Bonsai...go right ahead. Take care, Jason __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? The New Yahoo! Shopping - with improved product search http://shopping.yahoo.com ************************************************** ****************************** ++++Sponsored, in part, by Lisa Kanis++++ ************************************************** ****************************** -- The IBC HOME PAGE & FAQ: http://www.internetbonsaiclub.org/ -- +++++ Questions? Help? e-mail +++++ |
#15
|
|||
|
|||
[IBC] Maybe we should ask a different question.
To:
Date: 13 October 2003 15:06 Subject: [IBC] Maybe we should ask a different question. "If this is what our IBC has deteriorated to," [truncated message] ___________ Response: I often wonder when these types of questions start to spring up,if folks haven't reached the - I have mastered the Horticultural part - so what's next ? It's what you bring with you to Bonsai/Tree Penjing that makes all the difference. The more you cultivate yourself,the more you have to give. All these discussions on Art or Craft or Professional or Hobbyists always feel like lost souls looking for a path. Some of us just love trees,others like to prune.I guess it's what is important to you and how you refine it all. The desire to grow or mature in some manner. However you should be first comfortable with yourself. The tree is a reflection of your inner,often hidden mind. Khaimraj [ and some where in the distance temple bells sound as bowls are filled with tsampa[parasad]] Apologies for the mystical approach,it's the only way I could put it. ************************************************** ****************************** ++++Sponsored, in part, by Lisa Kanis++++ ************************************************** ****************************** -- The IBC HOME PAGE & FAQ: http://www.internetbonsaiclub.org/ -- +++++ Questions? Help? e-mail +++++ |
Reply |
|
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Peter Ho has different ideas. With a stack of films and TV dramasunder his belt as well as proving to be a hit in Crouching Tiger, HiddenDragon, he's hoping the Bond producers will encourage a different directionwith a Chinese Bond. Dressed to impres | Gardening | |||
Good morning or good evening depending upon your location. I want to ask you the most important question of your life. Your joy or sorrow for all eternity depends upon your answer. The question is: Are you saved? It is not a question of how good | United Kingdom | |||
Fish story and maybe we should start charging | Ponds | |||
[IBC] Altered work of art [#Was: Maybe we should ask a different question] | Bonsai | |||
[IBC] Maybe I should ask a different question. | Bonsai |