what is our responsibility when it comes to the war?

[mark pilato]

Should we as artist in this day and time be sculpting works that show our feelings about the war? I know a lot of you will fire back and say its up to the artist. But is it? is it our responsibility to do so?

[toyholic]

Should we as artist in this day and time be sculpting works that show our feelings about the war? I know a lot of you will fire back and say its up to the artist. But is it? is it our responsibility to do so?


I think if you already do work that is similar it fits right in. I do work about landmines, animal rights and my hatred for government in general . I do it to educate others about views that people may not see everyday.
I don't think it;s my responsibility to do it, but it is enjoyable and always a quick sell.

[Merlion]

I express my feeling through my sculptures, and I think many artists do. I do feel about human carnage, and about man-made disasters, and I do express them. My recent one to be displayed soon at a public Show, is shown below. Hope you like it.

Did I do this because it is my responsibility? To be frank, I really do not know, as this is getting to be a philosophical question. It depends on whether one takes the word 'responsibility' to mean an inner innate drive as a human being towards humanity, or some would say towards the creator, or God.

[mark pilato]

I do like it i wish I could see it bigger. When you sculpt are you a part of the form? Can you bring yourself to be the sculpture? Do you look out side of yourself when you are there and see what is around you? It looks like you do.
all the best,
mark

[RCFA-Raven]

I don’t feel it’s an issue of "responsibility," but rather if the artist is an "opportunist" or not.

[mark pilato]

Raven, not sure I know what you are suggesting. Are you saying if say someone does a piece on war, for or against - it would be only for the opportunity of getting recognized. If so i think that that person would have failed before they started.
again I am not sure what "opportunist" suggest can you clarify?
all the best,
Mark :)

[ironman]

Hi, my sculptures come from within, I try to express my feelings that way. I am not political (in my artwork, at least) and whatever you try to do the most important thing is to be true to yourself!
If you feel that you must express yourself politically, then by all means do so, but if you're forcing the issue, do the art that's TRUE TO YOU and be political in some other way.
Have a great day,
Jeff

[Merlion]

I do like it i wish I could see it bigger. When you sculpt are you a part of the form? Can you bring yourself to be the sculpture? Do you look out side of yourself when you are there and see what is around you? It looks like you do.


Did you click on the thumbnail image, Mark? And do you still like to see more details?

When I sculpt the person in agony, I did have this feeling generally, as this has to come from the heart. But of course artistically I tried to make the artwork as expressive, as high intensity as I could. This means full of tension in the muscles, both hands covering the face, and the whole body squeezed as small as possible.

Did I look outside of myself? As you noticed, I did, very much so. I casted my thoughts as wide and as far back in time as I could. This means the whole evolution of the human species, from the living species, starting from a primeval or primordal ooze.

These are concepts. After this, the tough task was to express all these skillfully as an artwork. Actually there were mistakes, accidents and compromises along the way. These were agoniising in themselves, to a certain extent, some blood, sweat and tears. ;)

[Cantab]

In the UK there is a long tradition of ‘war artists’, who have been employed by the Ministry of Defence to record, in art form, their sense of what war is and does. Similarly, if we look at early Henry Moore, say, we can also see a real interest in war and its effects. Moore’s drawings, etchings and sculptures offer, as well as a view of war, a perspective on human nature and the consequences of being human. Great art needs inspiration.
I also think that many artists pitch their work in the social context in which they live. For them, art is not just about 'personal feelings' or 'expressing oneself'. It has to be relevant and play a part. And perhaps if we feel strongly about something, it SHOULD show up in our work. Art must not get trapped in the purely aesthetic, otherwise it is just decoration, something nice for the garden or the lounge. Escapism, even.

[mark pilato]

very nice, Cantab, very nice, great examples of art in this context - I also agree with you on Moore - I had the chance to see some of his drawings just last week at a collectors house. Not only was Moore a great man he was also a very humble man. Just recently David Finn photographed my work he was Moore's photographer and new him well. This gave me an inside glimpse of the man and i was even more blown away by him - his tunnel drawings are chilling, have you seen them?.
all the best,
Mark

[sylviadkalinta]

The word "Responsiblity" has to be first understood and well taken into cognisance before the Question can be answered.To me our works should portray idealism and realism which is a picture of what we feel and already know in our sub-concious mind. War is what we have seen and feel so, we can make our work display the pains and values of war and that is our responsibility to help poeple see their imaginations and thoughts in reality on wood, steel,paintings and e.tc.Anyone that shears my view can reach me also on sylvia_doug@yahoo.com


Sylvia D.

[RCFA-Raven]

Raven, not sure I know what you are suggesting. Are you saying if say someone does a piece on war, for or against - it would be only for the opportunity of getting recognized. If so i think that that person would have failed before they started.
again I am not sure what "opportunist" suggest can you clarify?
all the best,
Mark :)
Being an oppertunist isn't a bad thing. It is mearly someone who sees the oppertunity and takes it. Many great things have come from oppertunists. I am not an oppertunists therefore feel I miss out sometimes. :(

[mark pilato]

Ravon, as artist should we not sculpt from the heart in a place that is honest in hopes that others will also see- not for gain but simple truth to convey. I am a sculptor I can say this because it what I do. I have been sculpting since I was a boy. Sometimes there is no other way for me but to act, to put voice to what I feel inside. For me to think of sculpting a piece because there is a war only for the opportunity, well i would be like an arms dealer. To sculpt a piece and give voice to the feelings that are inside is the artist way. To scream - to yell - to cry it out. Who else to do it but us. Get those feeling out - draw them - paint them - sculpt them - its the arts that show the way. Don't look for opportunity to speak what you feel- act - because its the right thing to do.
Ravon, you have a art school- is it only for the opportunity to make money or do you it because you love it? I think its because you love it, and its what you were born to do. So speak without the guilt of opportunity.
again sorry for spelling and poor writing I am dyslexic so this stuff is hard.
all the best ,
Mark :)

[JasonGillespie]

It seems to be a historical fact that artists have often (along with our literary brothers) been the documentarians of war. (and other human events) Whether it has been as propagandists supporting a regime, glorifying certain ideals supposed to be connected to war...or...as opponents of war, showing its horrors and atrocities...artists, and in recent years photojournalists/videographers too, have been the eyes of society...seeing what would ordinarily not be seen.

The issue of reponsibility is a recent one. Only in the past century and a half, as the role of the fine artist has morphed from commissioned artist for hire by patrons with specific purposes (religious, political, social) into more of a vestigal one, now producing the art first and looking for an interested dilettante or gallery, has this way of viewing artists gained any meaning. The few remaining private/civic/governmental organs that still commission work do so with hardly the same vigor or purposes as once was true in the past...still they are a ghost of a reminder of the rationale that drove the arts for millenia. So, the idea and precedent is still new...given the entirety of artistic endeavors. Maybe a fine tuning of the topic would help.

Is it a question of purely an 'artistic responsibility' merely because we have creative abilities or is there a deeper aspect to be divined? I wouldn't think that just the possession of artistic talent is a reason in and of itself any more than a movie star having a willing audience gives them the responsibility of speaking about an issue whether they have any real knowledge of it our not. (how often does that happen?)

I would say if there is a responsibility, it would be foremost to educate oneself about the subject being portrayed or conceptualized. If an artist does choose to do something of a expository nature...it shouldn't be from merely a knee jerk, uninformed place. That does little good other than perpetuate the ignorance that is rampant already about so many issues. In the past artists followed a tradition and kept their work to guidelines set forth by whatever patron was funding their work (in most cases)...amounting to the same sort of perpetuation of ignorance...or at best only told one particular side of a situation. As members of the greatest information age ever, if we have a responsibility it is, in my opinion, to try and be more truthful and less opinionated. Create art not just because we 'like' or 'dislike' something...but because we have taken the time to really understand an issue or thing...whatever it may be.

[anatomist1]

I would say if there is a responsibility, it would be foremost to educate oneself about the subject being portrayed or conceptualized. If an artist does choose to do something of a expository nature...it shouldn't be from merely a knee jerk, uninformed place. That does little good other than perpetuate the ignorance that is rampant already about so many issues.

I disagree with this, mostly. What art has to offer people is more about emotion or gut-level impression. If you want to present a balanced, informed exposition with issue analysis, write an article or blog. In general, I think art or music that tries to be about politics or anything else too complicated or heady usually fails for me, especially if it contains overt symbolism or some kind of 'deep' concept the audience is supposed to figure out. I usually find it insulting to my intelligence. Unless you live in the war zone, I don't think you have any business making art about war. It will be obvious it's coming from some kind of contrived intellectual place and not from your gut. If the war is having some kind of direct impact on your life, aside from something you are experiencing through mass media, and you make something about that impact specifically, it might be real and powerful, but it probably won't seem 'political'.

[G. Murdoch]

Back in 97 or 98? a Leonardo Da Vinci exhibit was at the Royal Museum in Victoria, B.C. for a couple of months. I went 4 times. Initially I was disappointed by the lack of fine art, and the preponderance of drawings and scale models. On subsequent visits to the exhibit, I read a lot of the text that accompanied the visuals, and was surprised to learn that the exhibit was a fairly accurate representation of Leonardo's carreer. The man produced a relatively small body of fully complete fine art works. He recieved much more work as a military engineer, designing fortifications, battlements, engines of war, catapults, bridges, etc...

Of course he was also a prolific journaler and sketcher, producing literally thousands of drawings of a huge variety, with a special abundance of drawings of flowing water, and birds (he was fascinated by fluid dynamics and flight).

I realise I am off the original topic of this thread, assuming we are meant to discuss the current conflict in Iraq, and the wider "war on terror". Personally I like Blake's sculptures (they often appear at the top of the screen for this forum).

I don't believe that artists have any particular responsibility to address political issues. I do believe that any individual artist who feels deeply enough about anything (political or not) has a responsibility to render thier feelings in thier medium of choice. Generally speaking, the inspiration for political artworks must be emotionally compelling, rather than cerebral abstract, for the finished work to be emotionally compelling for the viewer. There are many journalists who are very well equipped by the nature of thier chosen media to present cerebral, logical, rhetorical arguments about current events.

Graham

[Cantab]

(Moore's) his tunnel drawings are chilling, have you seen them?.
all the best,
Mark

Yes, Mark. An impressive body of work. I have actually been as impressed by Moore's drawings and etchings as his sculpture.
Good Moore image search:
http://www.picsearch.com/search.cgi?q=henry+moore+

[Cantab]

[QUOTE=JasonGillespie]I wouldn't think that just the possession of artistic talent is a reason in and of itself any more than a movie star having a willing audience gives them the responsibility of speaking about an issue whether they have any real knowledge of it our not. [QUOTE]

This is an interesting point. For some reason we have come to expect 'serious' artists and writers to maintain a relationship with truth, and to use their art at times to advance what they see as right. Hence we may expect a Picasso to offer a perspective/response to war (Guernica), but not Tom Cruise. Also, we tend to regard art that is not serious as somehow devalued in the process, calling such work 'pot boilers' or 'pulp fiction'. So, if seriousness/truth are linked in our minds with great art perhaps we do expect our artists at times to step out of the studio and get their emotional hands dirty.

Didn't the Renaissance also establish artists (and their art) at the vanguard of change? Isn't the artist a kind of hero to some? An eternal critic of the status quo? (See Pop art in the Sixties and Brit Art in the Nineties). We cannot insist on a 'responsibility' here, but we do look to artists and writers for alternatives to orthodoxy. Hirst has attacked the consumer culture with some force in his work. Why not attack the trashy outcomes of political activity? If your'e good enough!!

[robertpulley]

Anatomist1 pretty much said it for me. Make art, not war.

I said in an earlier post though that art seems to be on a continuum of content/ meaning. I see visual puns, jokes, illustrations, exercises in composition, prettiness, exercises in ego, all the way to work that amazes, confounds and awes. You speak with the voice you were given and tell the truth that is within you. I like a good joke, but I'm not any good at telling them. I don't think I could make a work about war much less this war particularly that would be more profound than work that I do on a regular basis.

[AKoch]

undefinedMy view is that our (sculptors) responsibilties towards such questions are the same as everybodies: we have to stop at red lights just like anyone else. As for special efforts, one need only to think of past efforts by truly big names like Goya to try to express something about feelings towards war. All these things like Goya's etchings are regarded as art objects, with little thought for the message. What I think an artist can contribute is a sense that there are better things in life than hate.

[Merlion]

It is actually quite simple to analyse. All human being has a moral responsibility towards things that are wrong in our society and our world, including wars. But when the person has special endowments and abilities, including artistic skills, the responsibility is heavier.

[desertrock]

I think creating art that represents values and ideals that flourish in peacetime can send just as powerful a message as art that illustrates the consequences and negativity of war.

[Daniel]

I would say that sculpting skill is just another tool in one's pack, like a writer's talents to wordsmith a biting commentary or an orator's gifts to sway the minds of a crowd. Imagine if Hitler had focused his persuasive skills to improve the world, instead of trying to take it over and exterminate the Jews. What we do with our talents is entirely up to us as individuals. I don't know that there is any particular responsibility that should be added to the conscience of someone who can sculpt. It is just another venue to share one's views and perceptions of the world around us.

[JaxKit]

Personally, I believe when art becomes my 'voice' that displays in public and influence minds and thoughts, than there comes some responsibility how I should chose to voice my opinions thru art. Do I present my voice in a fair and educated manner?? is it true to my concience at the same time?? Question I ask myself often.

While war represents destructions, loss of lives, all the ungly side of human nature, there're also strength of human spirit, such as love, compassion, sacrafices, courage that shines thru at times of such chaos. I would prefer to chose the latter as my voice.

:cool:

[RCFA-Raven]

as artist should we not sculpt from the heart in a place that is honest in hopes that others will also see- I don't think it has to be a separate thing. In other words, I don't think if a artist is an opertunist by nature that doesn't make his work devoid of feeling.

[mark pilato]

Raven- interesting , I don't agree with you that an artist that does a work on war is an opportunist. What is your definition of Opportunist? maybe thats where we stray. To me a opportunist is someone who takes advantage of a situation and to take advantage of war - well thats not so cool. But to take the opportunity to learn more - to educate yourself and others - to take the form as far as you can - finding things along the way - then this is an opportunity well worth taking. but then we are all opportunist every time we sculpt, aren't we? So help me her I still don't understand. Give me some examples from our history? Try Moore. Or Goya- start the sentence - Goya was an opportunist because....Or Moore shows us he is an opportunist because...... But first please give a description of opportunist.
All the best,
Mark

[robertpulley]

Another thought about trying to tie artists to someone's idea of responsibility:
The Soviet Union tried to put its artists to work making art that glorified the revolution, state heros and the power of the working man. It offered support to those who were responsible in their art making and official condemnation of those who persisted in making "decadent" art. Many of their best artists left the country. Others had to find ways to work unsupported by Soviet system.

Goya's work on war is extraordinary. Gary Burden (I hope I have the correct name) has done a lot of art that addresses the military and violence. But not every artist's talents are appropriate to those kind of messages.

[RCFA-Raven]

To me a opportunist is someone who takes advantage of a situation and to take advantage of war.
All the best,
Mark
I don't see an opportunist as someone that necessarly "takes advantage" of a situation as much as I see them noticing the opportunity and taking it. Not necessarly acutey agressive but you have to have a little to hop at an opportunity presented before you. Basically a broad spectrim deffination.

[Max Silver]

War is as old as humankind. It will never cease. We in the US are a free democracy because of wars. We will lose this gift when we lose the will to defend it. The citizens of North Korea are not free because of war. They will gain their freedom when they war to free themselves.

Artists should comment and opportunize where and when they feel compelled to do so. Would Auguste Rodin's Gates of Hell be a proper visual summary of all wars....... perhaps Picasso's Guernica?

[WeiMingKai]

what is our responsibility when it comes to Sports?
what is our responsibility when it comes to Love?
what is our responsibility when it comes to Pets?
what is our responsibility when it comes to Housework?
What responsibility do Artists have at all?

IMO Artists bear no special responsibility to anything beyond a choice to excersize thier talents creating artworks or not. If it happens that an artist is inspired to create works which offer political or social commentary so be it, that is what they should do. If your inspiration is to create horrific, offensive, or disgusting Art then have at it (just don't expect the world to react without horror, offense, and disgust to you and your work if you are any good at it). If you are compelled by your innermost being to bring a legion of sock-puppets or a warehouse full of dogs playing poker/velvet elvis/matador or 'Doggie-Elvis-Matadors-Playing-Cards' paintings then godspeed to you.

If you offer up discernable comment about the world through your art be prepared for some people to disagree with what you are 'saying'. That some folks won't approve or agree with the content is no reason to avoid creating it if you are able to withstand the criticism.

An artist requires an inspiration and War is a topic that is sure to stir powerful emotions/ideas in anyone who contemplates its meaning. Small wonder that many artists have channeled thier reactions to war into thier Art. An artist processes thier inspirations and ideas through an internal lens making adjustments, adding emphasis, pairing away the inessential, deciding how the concept of a particular work will mainfest - be it a nebulous platonic abstraction of geometric forms or the gritty immediacy of a hyper-realistically rendered mutilated corpse.

One thing Art can do is communicate powerfully, and the Artist is responsible for how they wield this power. I would hope that Artists would follow thier conscience when using thier power.

[tobias]

I cant possibly imagine any thing more distant from what I do as an artist. I believe that if you want to make a statement on some thing do it with words. I think it is far to easy to distort and difuse a political statement as it is (even when made in plane language on paper) let alone some thing that is suppost to symbolise your view point. If you want to get your view across stand up and say it dont hope that someone will interpret your work the way you ment it to be . This is just an opinion . If you want responcibility act responcibly.

[Cantab]

IMO Artists bear no special responsibility to anything beyond a choice to excersize thier talents creating artworks or not. If it happens that an artist is inspired to create works which offer political or social commentary so be it, that is what they should do. If your inspiration is to create horrific, offensive, or disgusting Art then have at it (just don't expect the world to react without horror, offense, and disgust to you and your work if you are any good at it). If you are compelled by your innermost being to bring a legion of sock-puppets or a warehouse full of dogs playing poker/velvet elvis/matador or 'Doggie-Elvis-Matadors-Playing-Cards' paintings then godspeed to you.

I'm not entirely convinced by this 'it's your choice what you do with your talent' argument, WeiMingKai. I do think there is a difference between painting, say, 'Guernica' and making sock puppets. And the difference for me is to do with the moral perspective we bring to our lives and work. I think the question 'What is our responsibility when it comes to the war?' invites us to think of the consequences for serious art if it is not ethically engaged. I don't regard sock puppets as serious art, so no issue there. I do regard most of the sculptors I know as serious practitioners, though, who decide quite carefully what they do, why they do it and what the values that underpin their work are. This is why the question of this thread is important, even if sculptors decide not to do political work.

[WeiMingKai]

Tobias: Here is a link to an image, one that I think makes a political statement that is not diffuse or ambiguous to anyone from my cultural background. This image conveys an idea/message with greater efficiency and power than having to read a description of it or an explanation of its cultural referents. The potency of imagery versus verbiage is a well accepted belief in our culture (hence the old saying 'a picture is worth a thousand words' and the domination of media by advertising).
http://www.ruppsworld.com/ProdImages/UV/village_bush_big.jpg
http://www.ruppsworld.com/ProdImages/UV/village_bush_big.jpg

Cantab: I am trying to find where what you say disagrees with anything I've said and I don't see any - if I've missed it help me out here.

Sock-Puppets are not serious and you would drop them from this discussion - I get it. (There goes my plans to announce my new work 'Guernica 2: Sock-Puppet Boogaloo')

Lots of discussion can be had about Ethics, Seriousness, Sculpture, and War but the existance of any dependancy or predication of one atop the other seems strangely left out of the discussion - which to me opens the door to my 'it's your choice what you do' line.

Are we going to assert something determinant like:

Serious Artists have a responsibility to be ethically engaged and War is both serious and laden with ethical significance.

do we reformulate that into:

Artists are responsible for engaging the war through thier work.

which i would disagree with saying an Artists only reponsibility is to create, the content and focus of that work is free from any obligation. If seriousness is to be defined as limited to ethically engaged works, then not all works will be serious. Simply being an Artist does not entail anything beyond creating work (in any medium) - everything beyond creating work is an act of personal conscience/choice - to be serious, to be ethically engaged, to confront war, to include these elements in the work, or to refrain from doing any of these things yet still produce work, that's an artist.

Is a non-representational artist whose work gives no indication that it expresses ethics of any kind a serious artist?

Is a graphic artist who depicts Bush as a Vampire serious?

[obseq]

I'm not entirely convinced by this 'it's your choice what you do with your talent' argument, WeiMingKai. I do think there is a difference between painting, say, 'Guernica' and making sock puppets. And the difference for me is to do with the moral perspective we bring to our lives and work. I think the question 'What is our responsibility when it comes to the war?' invites us to think of the consequences for serious art if it is not ethically engaged. I don't regard sock puppets as serious art, so no issue there. I do regard most of the sculptors I know as serious practitioners, though, who decide quite carefully what they do, why they do it and what the values that underpin their work are. This is why the question of this thread is important, even if sculptors decide not to do political work.

Cantab,

Not everyone is interested in placing purely subjective artistic endeavors against any from of a moral/ethical/sociopolitical rubric. The "consequences" of art that is free of "ethical engagement," as you note, do not exist in any objective consideration whatsoever.

It is far too reductive to assert that only a serious consideration of "moral perspective" and our artistic 'responsibility' therein is an effective and accuate marker of 'worthy' art.

What you speak of is solely what you value and that's fine--
But you don't need me to tell you that. ;)

[Cantab]

Hi WeiMingKai. If the choice is between “Serious Artists have a responsibility to be ethically engaged and War is both serious and laden with ethical significance.” and “If your inspiration is to create horrific, offensive, or disgusting Art then have at it (just don't expect the world to react without horror, offense, and disgust to you and your work if you are any good at it). If you are compelled by your innermost being to bring a legion of sock-puppets or a warehouse full of dogs playing poker/velvet elvis/matador or 'Doggie-Elvis-Matadors-Playing-Cards' paintings then godspeed to you.”, then I’ll go for the former. I don’t think the issue is whether artists want to produce war art or not, as if its just, well, an act of personal choice. I feel that many artists, like Henry Moore and Picasso, have seen the production of war art as acts of artistic integrity. They have formed their idea of the artist in a noble mould, and that’s what drives them to such work. They don’t get up in the morning and ask themselves ‘Oh, what will I make today, then. A nice glove puppet, I think, or maybe something disgusting’. Their work is an ongoing exploration of fundamental human questions within the demands of an artistic discipline, and that has GOT to lead you eventually to dealing with war. So, I am expecting many serious British and American artists to eventually get round to dealing with this (Iraq). Certainly the writers are already doing so. No offence, though. I personally see art as a kind of religious thing (read Don Cupitt on this). My ISC registration has the strap line ‘Pietra viva’, a phrase I picked up learning to sculpt in stone in Carrara, Italy. It means ‘living stone’. For the Carrarese sculptors the stone is sacred, and the artists duty to it equally sacred. Marble starts out as living organisms, they die, they are turned to stone, and brought to life again by the sculptor. It is to this process of life and death (and life again) that we commit ourselves. If the stone sculptor ends up completing a work on Iraq, or war, it is doubly meaningful as a result. The stone and the artist’s duty to it are echoed in the subject – it’s a story of life and death.
By the way, I like your idea of the artist's 'internal lens' - this means a lot, and may account for a lot that I say here.....

[mark pilato]

Cantab, Pietra viva, I agree with all that you wrote. to me first and formost is artistic integrity.
Mark
http://www.pilatostudios.com/pages/home.html

[tobias]

WeiMingKai this image does have some potency to it but it is still watered down and subject to interpertation. A vampire depending on who you talk to draws its life force from a victum does this mean that bush is doing this to america or the statue of liberty. Why is bush so big does the artist mean to suggest that he is such a huge force that he can destroy this monument with his bare hands or teeth. Is this an economic reference or social. If i say bush is bleeding america dry this is a common economic reference not social. I think that most of this would be cleared up if he just told us what he was thinking. I know he doesnt like bush or he doesnt like what bush is doing or he thinks bush is a vampire or he thinks bush is a very powerful force or....

[mark pilato]

I think a sculpture of Liberty would do much beter, one sculpted today with a referense on this war. I can see her in my mind and she is still strong but there is someting else. What a trip that would be, to find Liberty in this day and age. Way to much work for me, the ups and downs, the reserch... what the hell, i will give it a go.
all the best,
Mark
http://www.pilatostudios.com/pages/home.html

[WeiMingKai]

Tobias: I concede that imagery is subject to interpretation of the viewer and that process determines all understanding and comprehension of the images significance. It follows inevitably that each individual who engages in image interpretation has a unique perspective and capacity born of thier life experiences (education, beliefs, attitudes) and so if any two individuals are asked to interpret an image there will be differences in what they say. This is true for all imagery and is sometimes specifically sought by artists looking to elicit a reaction in those who observe thier work.

That image appeared on the cover of 10/20/2004 Village Voice with the caption 'Sucking Democracy Dry' in the lower L corner. Inside the paper were 2 articles - neither were specifically about Vampires, Statues, Giants, or Blood (one was about a gay marriage ban support rally in DC and the other about the 2004 election). Clearly the viewers were invited to interpret the imagery on the cover, and the editors chose the cover art and caption as being complimentary to each other (as is commonly done with just about every topic about anything - from childrens stories to car ads to religious imagery) viewers are encouraged to interpret images not as a poor 'watered down' substitute for specific verbal articulation but as an evocative stimulation of viewer imagination. Effective imagery/art tends to 'hit the communicative mark' more often than not - as is the case with the Bush image - evoking a possibly wide range of interpretations as was definitely intended.

I did find your interpretation of the image as saying 'Bush is a giant who can destroy monuments with his teeth' interestingly different from mine but you went on to generally hit some other key points of what the image says to me (and to you, and to others probably). The thing is it is ok and desireable for viewers to have multiple levels of inerpretation/appreciation/meaning for a visual piece - the more facets they can 'see' the better and more compelling the image becomes.

So I was wrong about ambiguity and imagery but we disagree apparently on if that is 'good' or 'bad'.

[tobias]

WeiMingKai I just wanted to point out that it is dificult to make a clear statement with an image. Which I think should take any responcibility for interpertation away from the artist. There for it is not really a matter of responcibility but choice. If I were to feel so strongly about something that i felt responcible to make a statement about it I would surely not want that statement misread. So i dont want to have any thing to do with this in art. I am sure you can tell I have strong beliefs and i choose to let people know them in no uncertain terms.

[mark pilato]

I think art should always be looked at with a new eye. When i am done a sculpture and it is placed in a public space I am always siked to here what others have to say. They have no idea who I am so i can just sit and listen. Sometimes they see it as I see it, and sometimes they show me something i did not know. If they say it's crap then, oh well. If you are honest then who cares if some people miss the point. If I am always concerned about what others will say I will never find the way. Its only my insecurity that holds me back. . But if i let all that go....
all the best ,
Mark
http://www.pilatostudios.com/pages/home.html

[Blake]

As artists I feel that we have a duty to speak where we can, expressing in images as much of, and as close to an objective truth as is possible, for we can offer a perspective on human nature as well as the nature of our society. Although it is difficult to make a clear statement with an image the artist can only be held responsible for his intented message, the audience must bear a responsibility towards their interpretation.

Below is the story of a sculpture that was inspired by war, repression and freedom.

"1989: Emerging Continents"
This sculpture expresses compassion and solidarity for victims of an oppressive government in China in the portrait of a young oriental man, and represents liberation and hope in an African man, emerging from a marble block.

The inspiration for this project came in June of 1989, as the Chinese government met the pro-democracy movement with repressive action in Tiananmen Square. This brutal silencing of a student congregation became the spark that was to initiate this political statement in marble. The image that haunted me was a head bowed in surrender and submission, a young Chinese student buried to the neck in political turmoil.

Later that year, I travelled to Berlin arriving on the morning of the eleventh of November to witness the collapse of the wall. History was being made and I felt that I had a responsibility to mark its’ passage. I spent the second day there trying to obtain a piece of the Wall as a symbol of Communist repression.

I left Berlin inspired with ideas and images of revolution, freedom, and victory, the triumph of a people over a repressive government. These images mixed in my imagination with those of subjugation and failure as was experienced in Beijing, and brought me to visualize one of the dichotomies of political reality; revolution is treason for those who are being disposed. I would develop this theme in my search for expression, and return to the image of surrender and victory beside each other, freedom and repression back to back.

Then political upheaval again rocked the world, the apartheid government in South Africa released Nelson Mandela, and with this news came my focus, the image of a native African rising in triumph from the restrictions of a political power, emerging from the bonds of stone. His raised hand clutches a piece of that Wall, representing those political injustices that he survives, and at his back, the Chinese student, head bowed in submission sinking into the depths of repression.

Publicly displayed, this sculpture has evoked conflicting emotions; once a swastika was pencilled on the marble. It's significance can be understood in many different ways, however, after I had washed off the graffiti, I thought that perhaps I had silenced a voice and the work was less complete as a result. At another time, the work was subject to physical attack and the face of the African shows the marks of some twenty blows that struck and chipped the surface of the portrait. Rather than thinking of the sculpture as now being flawed, I wished to view this disfigurement as in some way confirming the essence of the democratic process: A voice for all who care to speak.

The sculpture was created in 1990 in marble thanks to a friend and patron Mr. Ted Field to whom I owe my most sincere gratitude for his trust and his belief in my work.

Blake

[mark pilato]

Hi Blake, great sculpture, congratulations, I only wish I could see it in person. Like Michelangelo's slaves I want to tuch them I look forward to seeing more of your work.
all the best,
Mark

[Blake]

Mark Thank you for your comments

The responsibility of the artist

I thought that I would give this example of the type of political statement that we as artists can make about socio-political issues, and which I believe remains our responsibility to make.
My idea of the artists’ responsibility drives me towards ethically and moral engagement with society. For we as artists can offer a distinct perspective on human nature and in the role as commentator or perhaps critic. However, the artist in this position acts as a form of visual journalist, and must take the time to research and contemplate the issues being presented.
The above sculpture is an example of what I feel is our responsibility when it comes to war.
Although it is difficult to make a clear statement with an image the artist can only be held responsible for his intended message, the audience must bear a responsibility towards their interpretation.

[sculptor]

responsibility
generally, i'm rather apathetic---(warsux people shouldn't do it...etc.)

a few years ago, I was invited to offer a macquette for a postmortem medal of honor winner

honesty forms a basis, and I came up with an heroic(8') hero--weapon slung, carrying his helmet, marching happily away from battle

attached at the ankles was his mutilated corpse, who'se outstreatched arms-hands were touching the 12 ft legend Shadow cast on the wall behind the hero.

I thought it told the story well, with text concerning the young mans life and heroism and death and his family's thoughts

----
treat all with compassion and integrity and maybe the killing stops?

[Duck]

As artists I feel that we have a duty to speak where we can, expressing in images as much of, and as close to an objective truth as is possible, for we can offer a perspective on human nature as well as the nature of our society. Although it is difficult to make a clear statement with an image the artist can only be held responsible for his intented message, the audience must bear a responsibility towards their interpretation.

Below is the story of a sculpture that was inspired by war, repression and freedom.

"1989: Emerging Continents"
This sculpture expresses compassion and solidarity for victims of an oppressive government in China in the portrait of a young oriental man, and represents liberation and hope in an African man, emerging from a marble block.

The inspiration for this project came in June of 1989, as the Chinese government met the pro-democracy movement with repressive action in Tiananmen Square. This brutal silencing of a student congregation became the spark that was to initiate this political statement in marble. The image that haunted me was a head bowed in surrender and submission, a young Chinese student buried to the neck in political turmoil.

Later that year, I travelled to Berlin arriving on the morning of the eleventh of November to witness the collapse of the wall. History was being made and I felt that I had a responsibility to mark its’ passage. I spent the second day there trying to obtain a piece of the Wall as a symbol of Communist repression.

I left Berlin inspired with ideas and images of revolution, freedom, and victory, the triumph of a people over a repressive government. These images mixed in my imagination with those of subjugation and failure as was experienced in Beijing, and brought me to visualize one of the dichotomies of political reality; revolution is treason for those who are being disposed. I would develop this theme in my search for expression, and return to the image of surrender and victory beside each other, freedom and repression back to back.

Then political upheaval again rocked the world, the apartheid government in South Africa released Nelson Mandela, and with this news came my focus, the image of a native African rising in triumph from the restrictions of a political power, emerging from the bonds of stone. His raised hand clutches a piece of that Wall, representing those political injustices that he survives, and at his back, the Chinese student, head bowed in submission sinking into the depths of repression.

Publicly displayed, this sculpture has evoked conflicting emotions; once a swastika was pencilled on the marble. It's significance can be understood in many different ways, however, after I had washed off the graffiti, I thought that perhaps I had silenced a voice and the work was less complete as a result. At another time, the work was subject to physical attack and the face of the African shows the marks of some twenty blows that struck and chipped the surface of the portrait. Rather than thinking of the sculpture as now being flawed, I wished to view this disfigurement as in some way confirming the essence of the democratic process: A voice for all who care to speak.

The sculpture was created in 1990 in marble thanks to a friend and patron Mr. Ted Field to whom I owe my most sincere gratitude for his trust and his belief in my work.

Blake


That your statue remains at all..

well, I gotta say, they are either a very graceful people or have one hell of a sense of humor.

[Blake]

Dear Duck
I am pleased that the work has evoked a reaction that is the point of the exercise.
Your point remains unclear.
Perhaps this is all too serious for you, is decoration more the purpose of your work? Even with a good sense of humour, three metric tonnes of marble will be difficult to erase, remove or ignore.

Although it is difficult to make a clear statement with an image the artist is responsible for his intended message, the audience must bear a responsibility towards their individual interpretation.

Sculptor
I think you told the story very well, any photos of the piece?
Treat all with compassion and integrity yet I doubt the killing will ever stop, it is not in our nature.
Blake

[Duck]

Clearly I’m new to the art world and need to learn a lot, my goal is to create a decent sculptures within the next few yrs., along the way I hope to understand some of the ‘business’ aspects of art as well. Will someone please break these two questions down so us newbeez might understand.
Thanks,
Lawrence Duckworth

#1 Why would anyone commission a Canadian school boy to try and illustrate the feelings and sufferings of an oppressed people?

#2 How could anyone walk by Blaks statue and not laugh and say loudly, "what a bunch of bullshit"?

[deborah4923]

I just looked at Blake's website and Duck's homepage, which make Duck's "comments" about Blake's work even harder to understand. Also Duck's comments constitute the first time I have ever seen any on this site that weren't either encouraging or constructive (and usually both). Why are you being so mean-spirited, Duck? Do you have anything worthwhile to say? Why don't you tell us what you mean by "decent sculptures"? Obviously, what you've seen here is not what you intend to do when you break into the art world. Enlighten us.

[JasonGillespie]

Duck,

In response to your questions:


#1 Why would anyone commission a Canadian school boy to try and illustrate the feelings and sufferings of an oppressed people?

#2 How could anyone walk by Blaks statue and not laugh and say loudly, "what a bunch of bullshit"?

I will address your second question first....Your 'newness' to the art world may in part account for your lack of discernment in regard to Blake's works and your characterization of his work as "a bunch of bullshit" makes that possibility near certain. Besides being rude, it is the sort of unsophistocated commentary that is usually associated with those that don't understand art. Given your own self-confessed inexperience with the larger world of art, might you not accept that the subtle qualites of Blake's sculpture(and possibly many others) are, at the moment at least, beyond your grasp?

The meaning of a piece of art is not always the most obvious of its qualities. Just as in literature, metaphors and symbolism abound and a superficial reading can leave a viewer with less than the whole story. Art demands interaction and not just passivity. This interaction is one of the great things about art. The viewer can't just walk up and turn it on like a TV where the viewer is spoon fed the meaning of things.......art has to be dealt with mentally as well as visually. A person who brings nothing to the experience of looking at artwork may take nothing away.

I am almost positve most of those here would not walk by Blake's sculpture and think as you do. That should make you wonder what you are missing.


As to your first question.....the obvious answer is that no matter where we are from, we are all human and can feel empathy for others. (Whether we chose to or not is another story) Beyond that, it is probably sufficient to say that Blake, as an accomplished sculptor, is more than capable of dealing with issues of this nature. Rather than question his credentials, I would see what might be learned from his work....If your goal is, as you stated, "to create a decent sculptures within the next few yrs."

[tobias]

Duck I would have to say that there is not much chance of you creating a decent sculpture in your life time as you obviously dont have a clue what decent sculpture is . I would if I were you keep your ignorance to your self and go back to making daisys out of steel or what ever passes in your closed mind as sculpture.
Blake I hope you dont take a word of this fools to heart. I may not agree with art and war but I do think that if you want to make a statement do it some how Even without the statement your work has and allways will stand on its own as masterful
To every one else if this was too much I apologise
tobias

[obseq]

Duck,

Feel free to critique, but be constructive in the process.
Insults wont be tolerated.

Everyone-- Save the personal comments for private messages and out of the thread.

[Cantab]

#2 How could anyone walk by Blaks statue and not laugh and say loudly, "what a bunch of bullshit"?

When Blake posted his two figures on this thread, I stared at them for some time, opening up the thumbnails to inspect the sheer quality of the craftsmanship. Superb. Just superb. I haven't seen better modelling of heads and torsos anywhere, even in my beloved Carrara. (And, Duck, I've seen everything!). The artistic concept is really good too, with the figures emerging from the stone. Reminds me of Michelangelo, and his liking for figures emerging from the uncarved block - called non finito sculpting in Italy. (I believe Michelangelo actually invented this great 'modern' tradition, to which Blake contributes so effectively).

[Blake]

Fellow Artists
I thank you for your kind words and your assertive defence.

One of the things that is both wonderful and painful about displaying our artwork to the public is that we bear our soul for all to see and to criticise.

I feel that we as artists have a responsibility to engage society in our work and this commitment will result in persons attacking the work for whatever reasons.
In order to protect my sensitive side from such negative condemnation I like to view the type of criticism, such as Mr. Duck has declared, as I have viewed the physical disfigurement of this sculpture itself; it confirms the essence of the democratic process: A voice for all who care to speak.

Further, as an artist I try to determine if the criticism has merit and if indeed there is value within the opinion. In this case I would very appropriately dismiss Mr. Ducks points with a favorite saying, “Water off a duck's back”

Allow me return to the only valid concern within the critique.
We have come to expect artists who address these types of socio-political issues to maintain a relationship with an objective truth, even when artists use their art to advance ideas concerning their personal or ethical beliefs. It is considered a prerequisite that the artist be speaking of an issue that has had some direct impact or influence in their life and that they should render honest observations in hopes that the audience will become informed or aware of the intellectual issues portrayed in the work.

I feel confident that my research was complete, my position was informed and that there was some, although distant, impact of the issues on my life, where I have failed completely is in informing Mr. Duck of any of the intellectual issues portrayed.

Blake

[Scout]

The only thing I can grasp from all this is one statement made by Cantab....."contributes so effectively". I think all else would be decoration. But what do I know. Scout

I'm a sculptor at heart, trying to teach my hands and mind to say what my heart feels. (Sappy I know)

[Stevem]

Hey Duck.

I really don't know what prompted your response to Blakes work with such strong malevolence; however that being said, you did mention that your goal was to create decent sculptures in the next few years and to learn the business aspects of art. I had the opportunity to meet Blake this past year and I have to say you may have burnt one of your best "learning" bridges you could have ever crossed. Blake is probably the most professional, down to earth, helpful person/sculptor I have ever had the opportunity to meet. Whenever I have a question concerning a technique or the business side of sculpture I email him and without any pompousness he is always there to offer advice that makes a huge difference in the question at hand. Blake is a very acclaimed sculptor who's talent and business savy is way beyond anything I could offer him in return for his help but he still treats me and anyone else who asks as if we are all on the same level of competence.

I hope you can look back on this and learn a little of the business aspects of art. It's all right to have your own opinion of someones work. It's even all right to voice your opinion, but one should have a little tactfullness when they verbalize their opinion. Not just go for the jugular. I have found in life you can go alot farther by not antagonizing people about something you may not understand but by simply asking questions. There is alot of work out there that I really don't understand but I try to keep an open mind and try to take from that viewing experience what I can and learn from it. Even if I don't care for a work there is something in the artists production or even in the way they promote their work that I can learn from. Maybe you will see something that you want to emulate in another way or maybe you will even see a presentation style you may want to try or avoid. It's a small world and The Art world is even smaller. I suggest trying to make friends and not adversaries.

Good luck with your forthcoming adventures,
Steve Miller

[tobias]

Duck,

Feel free to critique, but be constructive in the process.
Insults wont be tolerated.

Everyone-- Save the personal comments for private messages and out of the thread.
Again I wish to apologise after reading the responce from Blake I feel like a bull in a china shop.
tobias

[Blake]

Tobias
I don’t think that it is you that need apologise.
Cantab
I thank you for your comments, there are many very beautiful and highly competent sculptures in and around Santa Petra I am honoured to have a place among them.

Stevem
Thanks for your support, you see the help I give out does come back to me.

To return to the idea being discussed in this thread, which I think is very important, I have prepared a small essay I would love to have all or any of your thoughts on the content.

Many consider that an artist has no further obligation than to create.
If the artwork deals only with personal feelings or expression or involves purely aesthetic concerns; it will be recognized as decoration alone.
Yet, artists are often viewed as the forerunner of change and have a long history of creating artistic commentary concerning social and political issues. For artists can offer a perspective on human nature as well as the nature of our society.

It has been suggested that if an artist feels deeply enough about a subject, whether aesthetic, political or moral, then the artist has a responsibility to render their feelings in their art.
However, further responsibility is conveyed upon the artist should the work seek to influence the public or audience. As in this case the artist has a responsibility to depict or convey the truth or facts with integrity and the artwork should be less orientated towards opinion. As critic, the artist herein acts as a form of visual journalist, and must have taken the time to understand the issues being presented.

We have come to expect artists who address these types of issues to maintain a relationship with an objective truth, even when they use their art to advance ideas concerning their personal ethical beliefs. It is considered a prerequisite that the has artist be speaking of an issue that has had some direct impact or experience in their life and that they should render honest observations in hopes that the audience will become informed or aware of the intellectual issues portrayed in the work. Ideally the artistic integrity would include the creation of the artwork for the cause that is represented rather than for financial gain.

For the work to be convincing, it must leave an emotional impression with the viewer and present intellectual and rational arguments about the specific event or issue. The advantage may be that the images within the artwork can communicate a more sensitive and intuitive message than can be achieved by words. As a visual language, art is universal and the images may still be able to obtain some of the analytical nature usually attributed to a written language.

An image often conveys an idea or a message with great efficiency, yet the artist can only indicate their intention within the force of the imagery, the interpretation is the property of the audience but a wide range of interpretations is desirable to a point.

To conclude, our responsibility when it comes to war is to speak as we can and within our ability to be impartial and truthfully render our expression to represent our feelings, experiences and beliefs, in order to benefit or assist our fellow human beings.
We have an important and forceful voice and we have the responsibility to use it.

Blake

[Duck]

“Emerging Continents" one of the first memorable works I discovered browsing the net, I spent a good bit of time dealing with some personal thoughts and emotions the work provoked in me, never mind the physical aspects of the sculpture for now. At first I assumed Emerging Continents to be the expressions of an extraordinary local artist. When I read on this thread that it was created by a Canadian Ivy League type, I felt I had been dooped, suckered. How could he know anything about war and oppression, and the nerve of the money man and this Ivy Leaguer to show it off in public. Well, believe me, my first response wasn’t anything like I posted.

I play a bit of piano music created by some popular traditional composers, when an untrained ear listens and boast how wonderful and emotional I play, I quietly think, you’re full of shit, I’m a pretender. No way could I ever know the feelings of any of the Greats and interpret them honestly..it’s impossible, it’s bull shit to think otherwise, and this is the basic context I viewed the doop…. BullShit!!! You’re a pretender.

One of many things that appeals to me about visual art is the honesty, now, after reading the responses and especially Jason Gillespie’s, (he did such a nice job of saying what a dope I am, and at the same time encouraged me to look further, nice job Jason). So, I’ve reconsidered my total overall reaction to Blake’s Emerging Continents….isn’t my emotional reaction to Blake being the artist much like that of the vandal’s? Is this the reaction Blake hoped for from the type people Jason Gillespie described? And is it possible…. after the anger subsides, I (the vandal) realize that the artist is also saying to all outsiders, him included, we will never understand!!

Congratulations Blake!




Lawrence Duckworth

[Blake]

Dear Duck
I applaud your ability to learn from an experience.
I personally was not as offended by your remarks as many others seemed to be and I am very much heartened and encouraged by their support.
I do not think that questioning the sincerity or integrity of a politically inspired work is unreasonable and to this extent I have posted the full story behind 1989 Emerging Continents on my site at http://www.sculptureblake.com/latest/index.asp
Should anyone wish to view a more detailed version of events leading up to the creation of the work.

This work has proven to be very emotive and thus I believe it to be successful. To this day I don’t understand why it attracts vandals, but it is certain that never having lived the oppression nor the revolution I will only ever know an impression of them and empathy for those concerned.

I wish I could return this thread to the original point and have tried several times now, I have posted a short essay in post number 58. Is there anyone who would like to comment?

Blake

[Stevem]

Blake,

Sorry it took me so long to post to your question for us all. I needed time to think about this and organize my thoughts.

I agree mostly with what you are saying. As an artist we have to be in tune with what is going on around us. The everyday distractions of life is what shapes and molds our very being. So when this all builds up inside us we have to have some sort of carthartic release. Hence our creation of art. Now to go a step further. Some people consider this carthartic release therapy and the creation is no more to them than that. Then you have the people who create just to create. Others will feel obligated to research these issues which concern them and try to convey a message. In "my opinion" this is what makes "good art". I enjoy looking at a piece and getting lost in it, coming away with a feeling of relation or understanding. I think this is what makes a succesful piece of art. I know when I make a piece and someone says "wow! I know that feeling!" or "I have felt that way so many times!" To me, I know my piece was a success. There is no better feeling than when someone gets your work.

As an artist, I like to think I see the world with a more open mind. I like to look at different situations going on around us and try to capture what is at the depth of different plights. Hence, my newest work " The Emotion of Hands " I don't know that I feel obligated! I would say I feel more compelled to create these works. I do think to produce a piece of art succesfully one does have to do their research. Get the background on whatever you are trying to convey. I will agree with you that if you produce a piece trying to form public opinion you should "maintain a relationship with an objective truth". However; depending on what relationship you have with these issues their can be different trues. There is only right and wrong , true, but in forming public opinion there is always two sides to every story, so in swaying public opinions about certain facts the artist is opening theirselves up for public critisism.

I think most people are more visually influenced than in any other way so I will agree with your assessment of art as a visual language. Art has a way of crossing barriers. I still remember my experience in Italy. I remember how I was able to make many friends who I couldn't communicate with verbally because of the language barrier, but we could understand what drove each other from the art we produced. So I also agree with you on the idea of art as a way of breaking down barriers and sharing beliefs.

Now in conclussion to our responsibility when it comes to war. I don't think an artist should feel responsible to render something that represents their idea of war. I do think there is nothing wrong with creating a piece of art that portrays their feelings. Especially if that is their own carthartic release. I also don't hold anything against someone wanting to express their beliefs in hopes of assiting others. I applaude it. But thats not to say "you're an artist you HAVE to create a piece of art showing us your feelings on war".


Tobias
I don’t think that it is you that need apologise.
Cantab
I thank you for your comments, there are many very beautiful and highly competent sculptures in and around Santa Petra I am honoured to have a place among them.

Stevem
Thanks for your support, you see the help I give out does come back to me.

To return to the idea being discussed in this thread, which I think is very important, I have prepared a small essay I would love to have all or any of your thoughts on the content.

Many consider that an artist has no further obligation than to create.
If the artwork deals only with personal feelings or expression or involves purely aesthetic concerns; it will be recognized as decoration alone.
Yet, artists are often viewed as the forerunner of change and have a long history of creating artistic commentary concerning social and political issues. For artists can offer a perspective on human nature as well as the nature of our society.

It has been suggested that if an artist feels deeply enough about a subject, whether aesthetic, political or moral, then the artist has a responsibility to render their feelings in their art.
However, further responsibility is conveyed upon the artist should the work seek to influence the public or audience. As in this case the artist has a responsibility to depict or convey the truth or facts with integrity and the artwork should be less orientated towards opinion. As critic, the artist herein acts as a form of visual journalist, and must have taken the time to understand the issues being presented.

We have come to expect artists who address these types of issues to maintain a relationship with an objective truth, even when they use their art to advance ideas concerning their personal ethical beliefs. It is considered a prerequisite that the has artist be speaking of an issue that has had some direct impact or experience in their life and that they should render honest observations in hopes that the audience will become informed or aware of the intellectual issues portrayed in the work. Ideally the artistic integrity would include the creation of the artwork for the cause that is represented rather than for financial gain.

For the work to be convincing, it must leave an emotional impression with the viewer and present intellectual and rational arguments about the specific event or issue. The advantage may be that the images within the artwork can communicate a more sensitive and intuitive message than can be achieved by words. As a visual language, art is universal and the images may still be able to obtain some of the analytical nature usually attributed to a written language.

An image often conveys an idea or a message with great efficiency, yet the artist can only indicate their intention within the force of the imagery, the interpretation is the property of the audience but a wide range of interpretations is desirable to a point.

To conclude, our responsibility when it comes to war is to speak as we can and within our ability to be impartial and truthfully render our expression to represent our feelings, experiences and beliefs, in order to benefit or assist our fellow human beings.
We have an important and forceful voice and we have the responsibility to use it.

Blake

[mark pilato]

Wow, poured with only a few cracks? Sometimes maybe, we as artists look only to the negative places trying to fix and chase away all the positives that may get in the way. When I saw the pictures of Blakes work created in 1990 he took me away. He hammered, chiseled, and chassed, in what must have been an incredible journey of discovery. If you have worked with stone you know what I am talking about. The slow hum drums, the hours spent just above the form, meditative whacks, standing on stones flecked with the past. Blake’s work gives us a glimpse of what may be. So I say turn up the light instead of dimming it with personal insecurity.
All the best,
Mark

[Scout]

I can imagine Michaelangelo standing in the quarry looking around at the marble, seeing all the possibilities inside the marble. I see him pause at one particular piece, he places his hand on it, he wants it but he knows it was meant for another artist. He hesitates but, in his heart, he knows it belongs to some future artist called Blake.

The responsibilities of anyone who wants to make a statement is to just have the facts. But I think there is always someone with a differing view point, as well there should be. Checks and balances. Not too far either way. When you get older you (hopefully) avoid that pendulum coming back to knock you on your butt! Scout

[JamesW]

I like Stevem's take on it - rather than feeling obligated...feeling compelled.
Some quotes I like:

'To be an artist means never to avert one's eyes' - Akira Kurosawa

'Art is meant to disturb' - George Braque

'All art is political' - Jayce Salloum

James

[Blake]

JamesW and Stevem
I would say that you have expressed the attitude of the majority of artists, who if inspired by an idea can and often will use that idea to create a work that says something about the subject or issue.
I feel obliged, as an artist to look for issues that I feel passionate about and use these as ideas and inspiration in order to create a work filled with emotion and enthusiasm. I personally feel compelled not only because I believe that it is my responsibility to use this voice but also because I find passion and energy in the issues of which I speak and that passion and energy will contribute to the work.

Blake

[PAULHT]

As an Israeli Sculptor, deeply saddened by the present situation, I find myself constantly thinking about the war, constantly searching my imagination to find a sense of something worthy to make as a response!
Friends accuse me of being a Fascist, of supporting a fascist state and supporting a war that is being fought against civilians.
I know this is not the forum to qualify what is occuring, and I will not;
(I was recently in London, exhibiting with the RBS and was asked what was the present situation like- this was before the recent flare-up.
I said that finally the Palestinians have got something of their own and that I was extremely optimistic that we the Israelis can build a country that was as vibrant, democratic and forward looking as it can be and that Art was a dynamic force that would flower, sadly the wreckers from the north have made that impossible and we are forced to fight! This is not an opinion but a fact.)
So as to my work how can I ignore, I have to respond the problem is that my Academic background forces me into Aesthetic argument, and there is no beauty in War only destruction.
Sculpture that relates to that destruction is sculpture that needs to be made,
Sculpture that tells the story of this circle of Violence and hatred.
It will not be pretty or poetic, probably never be sold or seen out of the confines of my studio, but sculpture that I feel needs to be made!

[mark pilato]

Paulht, Good luck, I hope you find peace in your sculpture. There is a lot of hate in the world, a lot that is wrong, we could fill this data base and every data base and still not have room to store it all. With that said,what lives in your heart the sculpture that resides there is more powerful then all that is wrong, so bring it out and show us all the light. I hope you find what you are looking for and
all the best,
Mark
Sculpture I did for the families of 9/11 at Ground 0 New York City http://www.pilatostudios.com/pages/markAscent_056.html

[Blake]

Mark
Very nice piece, congratulations I would love to see some more photos of Asent. Is this the piece in your video? Did you do any writing about the work, in which case would you post it?
I think that it is wonderful to have a feeling about an issue that moves you and as an artist inspires you. I believe that this adds a great deal to my work. Would you agree?

Blake

[Blake]

PaulHT
I sympathise with you and am as well saddened by the present situation. Although I do not want to enter into a discussion about the politics involved, I would encourage you to try to express this/these issue/s in your work. You mentioned an aesthetic argument and the lack of beauty in war. I would be intrigued to see your interpretation of an aesthetic argument concerning this conflict within which you live.
Below I include several photos of sculpture in a series that I created to try to de-glorify war, (as all the war monuments that we see are dedicated to the glorious dead). I call these my “Fragments Collection”, this is a series of sculptures that are dedicated to the horrors of war and were intended to portray civilian causalities, these works have become devoted to the issue of Landmines specifically as it is here that I believe my work can actually do something about this problem. These sculptures represent my voice within this issue and my attempt not only to bring attention to this crisis, but ultimately to offer some hope in resolving the situation. I realize that I may not be able to change the world with these pieces of art but that will not stop me from trying, and I consider this as a form of activism within my work.
I hope that you can see some of the beauty in the work and the horror of the victim that the work portrays. I have employed a paradox concerning the creative cycle; I create the figure in clay in order to destroy it, and by destroying the clay I create the art.
I feel passionately about this politically oriented work and my responsibility to create, and exhibit this work to the world in hopes of advancing this cause and assisting with this problem.
I look forward to seeing your work Paul

[mark pilato]

Hi, Blake,
I always write with every sculpture I do, plus I take pictures and do video. It helps in every way. From looking at my work in deferent perspectives to documenting the process. I try to let people know how a bronze sculpture is made. I also find that if I write wile I am in the process of sculpting that it adds to the work and also helps me find what I am looking for. I am dislexic so it is very hard for me but I still do it because with every story I get a little closer to finding what I am trying to say - one day I hope to swim in words the way I swim in the clay. It's a great way to share life's esperance. I have done many stories about Ascent and the process of creating it, Every day I find new meaning in the form. The sculpture changed my life and I am a beter person for doing it. I am almost done with a video that I think tells its story best, I will share when that is done. the first part of vidieo is on my web page,
http://www.pilatostudios.com/pages/video.html-
All the best,

[Merlion]

I agree, Blake, as artists it is good to express our deep feelings through our artworks. The more we practice this, the more we can do it better. And the more the artworks viewers would appreciate the feelings that we put into it.

Writers communicate through their writings. We communicate through our artworks.

[jeffmonoxide]

I have a hard time finding feelings other than anger over war, so instead, I focus on Peace.

[robertpulley]

I just revisited this thread after a week or two and found it is still alive. PAULHT's response was especially poignant to me because it connects with what I have been feeling. I have Lebanese friend who is a painter and architect. I met him in my city in Indiana where his wife was working at the hospital as a pediatrician. We had an immediate rapport though we didn't get together much. Last year they and their two daughters moved back home to Beirut. Lama still has e-mail at the hospital where she works and we have set up a small dialogue. Her fear, anger, frustration and anxiety are intense. She says she feels like an insect and wants only to feel like a human being.

I very much wish that I could make a work of art that would get at how I feel, but it just hasn't come about. I tend to think my work abstractly reflects my world view, but I wish I could say something optimistic or profoundly insightful in such a tragic situation. Or express anguish in a way that would not seem self indulgent. As someone said earlier though, my connection to war is only abstract anyway. Others experience it directly and maybe they are the ones who need to make the art that addresses the situation.

[Duck]

Maybe a little humor will lighten things up?

In these serious times, it is important for all of us of all faiths to recognize these Four Religious Truths.

1. Muslims do not recognize Jews as God's chosen people.

2. Jews do not recognize Jesus as the Messiah.

3. Protestants do not recognize the Pope as the leader of the Christian World.

4. Baptists do not recognize each other at Hooters. :)


I hope for both of you, Paulht-that you do the sculpture, and RobertPulley-that your friends are safe.

May God Bless


duck

[mark pilato]

here's a picture of my piece at ground 0, the title is Ascent.

[Merlion]

These are nice works, Mark. Are they at the NYC ground zero? Looking at the buildings at the background, I don't quite expect there are ordinary buildings like that at that location.

It is interesting to compare/contrast your emotional reaction/response to 'the war', and that of mine. Yours caused you to create these sculptures called 'Ascent'. Mine caused me to create a sculpture called 'The Descent of Man'. A picture of this has been posted in the Polls thread 'What do ya all look like?'

[GlennT]

I believe that our responsibility is to be true to our highest self. That may or may not involve responding to war via art. For me, the best response to war that I can provide through my art is to create visions of peace and harmony, so as to turn thoughts away from war and to God and/or spiritual values that are of more lasting worth than war.
One's responsibility as a citizen and their reaction to war or any other circumstance in life may be different. This is a poor analogy, but does a plumber have a responsibility to respond to war while doing his plumbing?
If I have a commission that addresses war in some capacity, then that is when I will apply my thoughts and meditaion on the topic to the art. Otherwise, I will address the topic only if I feel moved to express something that I consider of value.
The topic is complex. I don't know that anyone needs a reminder that war, pain and suffering, destruction, etc are negative experiences. But I think that not enough thought has been given to actual causes of conflict, when if ever is war justified ( would a world run by Hitler be preffered to engaging in war? ) or to the sacrifice that is made by those who put themselves in the middle of such hell in order to defend the lives and freedoms of others.

[mark pilato]

Hi Merlion - Quote:"These are nice works, Mark. Are they at the NYC ground zero? Looking at the buildings at the background, I don't quite expect there are ordinary buildings like that at that location."

Yes the pictures were taken at Ground 0, from Saint Paul's grave yard across the street from were the towers fell. The one picture shows the grave stones at bottom, they are now at Saint Peters up town - 54th and Lexington across from the Nevelson chapel. Here is another picture of the bishop of New York blessing Ascent plus one of it at Saint Pauls church Ground 0.
all the best,
Mark

[Thatch]

Our responsibilty is to vote. The rest is privilege. If creating something to express your feelings about the war, the men and women who are committed to the duty, or any other idea or feeling you might have about what is taking place, is what you want then exersize your privilege. There is and has been great sacrifice for us to be able to do so.

Thatch

[Merlion]

Here is graffiti artist Banksy's response to the Guantanamo Bay camp. The link to the UK's Daily Mail article, and relevant excerpts are given below.

Banksy takes the Mickey with stunt at Disneyland (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/pages/live/articles/news/news.html?in_article_id=404653&in_page_id=1770)

Graffiti artist Banksy has struck again, this time erecting a life-size sculpture of a Guantanamo Bay inmate at Disneyland.

Families visiting the Los Angeles theme park saw a jarring figure — dressed in an orange jumpsuit with its hands and feet manacled — beside the Rocky Mountain Railroad ride. ....

His Disneyland piece was made out of an inflatable doll with a black hood.

It poked fun at the controversial detention of hundreds of terror suspects at the American naval base in Cuba.

Amnesty International has blasted the prison as a "human rights scandal".

The Disneyland sculpture remained in place for one and a half hours before it was spotted.

The ride was then shut down and the doll removed.

[GlennT]

Merlion:

Aside from the term " Graffitti artist " being an oxymoron, was Bansky's point to complain about how those who take joy in mass murder are detained and questioned in order to prevent further attacks on innocent civilians?

Those who call the "abuses" at Guantanomo "torture" have a definition that applies only to American prisons and cheapens the word, as it is three star hotel treatment in comparison to places in Asia, Africa, and Russia that actually do know the meaning of the word.

[Merlion]

GlennT. That was a sculpture related news article that came through, and as usual I posted it. I regret I didn't notice the date was Sept 11. I should not have posted it if I did.

[Thatch]

As long as the prisoners enjoy the rights and privledges as laid out by international law for prisoners of war then it doesn't really matter what anybody thinks.

As to what they might or might not have enjoyed or believed prior to being captured is quite beside the point as to how they should be treated by the US admin. Personal feelings and anniverseries aside, they have nothing to do with the law.

Merlion, thanks for posting that. It was quite a statement. I am sure what is going on in Iraq is troubling your part of the world as much as it does mine. If you don't know already what it means, look up the term "Tarbaby". I think we have a big tarbaby on our hands.

Thatch

[GlennT]

When Al Qaida, the Taliban, and other terroists decide follow international rules of law, they will be entitled to be treated as prisoners of war when captured. As long as they continue to target and blow up innocent civilians on purpose, dress as civilians, use civilians as human shields, hide their weapons in and shoot from Mosques, they are not entitled to the international rules laid out for prisoners of war, even though the US does tend to extend those rights anyway.

Why are those who are the good and fight to defend freedom more feared by the left than those who want to kill anyone who doesn't conform to their ideology? Has the moral confusion of this age led people to give up distinquishing between good and evil? Are the good who make mistakes on the same moral level as those who want to behead unbelievers, keep women subjugated and hidden away from the public, stone adulterors and cut of the hands of thieves, worship the cult of death and believe that blowing up innocent people entitles them to a reward of the apparently endless supply of virgins that inhabit the next realm?

I realize that politics and religion are hard topics, especially on an art oriented website, but this thread is here, and God help us if we always see the nation that stands for Liberty and opportunity as the enemy, always looking to condemn our mistakes but failing to understand the nature of this war of civilizations.

[Thatch]

It doesn't matter what rules other people follow, we must follow our own.

Thatch

[GlennT]

I am reminded of the British whose rule of warfare meant lining up in neat rows in an open field, while the Americans learned to fight like the Indians from under protective cover when needed. America won its freedom.

Civilized nations convene and create rules for certain types of humane treatment within the hell that is war. These rules are arbitrary but work because they are respected by the signitory nations.
Those who are not members of those signitory nations have not earned the right to be covered by those rules, although by the very decencey of civilized nations those rules may still be applied to them. It is a choice, not a given.

When you are facing a ravenous tiger and defending your children, even if you are a vegetarian and animal rights activist, their survival will most likely take precedence over the normal rules of your belief system. You will probably be inclined to shoot the tiger and save the moral judgements for later.

There are laws that come from a moral basis and must be preserved. There is also a bottom line survival instinct that I hope has not been hippy/drugged/pacified out of this generation. It is not always easy finding the balance or the middle way, but in some cases it does seem clear.

Glenn

[Thatch]

.


Hippies, you have got to be kidding me!


Thatch

[Blake]

GlennT

I couldn’t agree more with your statement:

When you are facing a ravenous tiger and defending your children, even if you are a vegetarian and animal rights activist, their survival will most likely take precedence over the normal rules of your belief system. You will probably be inclined to shoot the tiger and save the moral judgments for later.

However, even though we would not consider this person “sane” in our society, the possibility does exist that if you have no children and you are willing to die for what you believe you may be able to kill yourself or allow yourself to be killed for what you believe, sometimes circumstance takes over and you are no longer in control.

So directing the thread from you defending what you have considered as an attack on your culture back to the original question.
I hope you don’t mind me asking you, what do you feel is your responsibility as an artist to this conflict and how would you support/express your feelings with/thorough your art?
Do you feel that you have a responsibility to support/express your feelings with/thorough your art?

Blake

[GlennT]

Blake:

To answer your question more directly ( I thought I did so a number of posts earlier in this thread ) I do not feel that I have a "responsibility " to respond to war directly through my art. I may or may not have an inspiration or inclination to do so at some point, but not a responsibility.

I think my responsibility to react to war is as a citizen, irrespective of my profession. That could happen in any number of ways and even could include using the venue of art. It could involve such things as prayer for the protection of our troops, and of innocent civilians on either side of a conflict. It could involve letting our troops know that their efforts are appreciated, and that just because the media focuses on every negative aspect in order to present a certain slant on the story, we are aware of and appreciate the efforts made toward rebuilding, protecting, and various unreported elements of heroism that are just a part of "doing their job" in an extremely unpleasant situation.

During WW II American citizens were called upon to actually sacrifice to help towards the war effort. We understood that there was a good reason for fighting evil, and the particular face of it at that time. Even Hollywood lent their talents to support the cause. We are not called upon today to sacrifice much, to the extent that we have the freedom and temerity to trash the efforts of those who put their lives in danger for our defense.

Back to the art question....for me, my art comes from the heart, and if I feel a calling to react to war and express that in my art, there is plenty that I could draw from to do so. I fortunately have the freedom and safety, protected by others, so that I am able to focus on other things that are more important to me than war, such as spirituality and the growth of the human spirit. Also the wonderous beauty of nature. I believe that my "responsibility" is to use my art to add to the advancement of civilization toward a higher plane than what it is currently expressing. If focusing on war can achieve that, fine, but if it just serves to revolve the misery and suffering, than it is a waste of time from my perspective. I respect the rights of others to do so, but I don't have to respect the results. I think in this particular moment in time it takes very little courage to speak out against the war or this administration. It is expected of you if you are a part of the "in" crowd. It is the conformist rebellion with a very ready media waiting to broadcast anything that can hurt us.

As an aside,I feel a bit sorry for those who feel that figurative art is dead. To me that implies that their spirit is dead, because the human form is the vehicle we have been provided to express the nature of spirit in this world. How can the expression of that be tied to one particular age and be insignificant in another?

Regards,
Glenn

[Blake]

GlennT
I thank you for your elegant response.

..for me, my art comes from the heart, and if I feel a calling to react to war and express that in my art, there is plenty that I could draw from to do so.

I believe that my "responsibility" is to use my art to add to the advancement of civilization toward a higher plane than what it is currently expressing. If focusing on war can achieve that, fine, but if it just serves to revolve the misery and suffering, than it is a waste of time from my perspective.

As an aside,I feel a bit sorry for those who feel that figurative art is dead. To me that implies that their spirit is dead, because the human form is the vehicle we have been provided to express the nature of spirit in this world.

The figure is not dead we are many who are keeping it alive.
And along with the figure, I believe that we need to use our art to pioneer positive change, encourage social engagement and nurture constructive commitment in an attempt to help resolve an issue in a positive manner. This goes for many issues not just war, I just want to make a small difference, I don't know that I will be able to, as you have said "advance civilisation", but I believe that it is my responsibility to try to change things because I have the opportunity, the possibility that my art allows me; a platform from which I can voice my opinion, and this opportunity carries a responsibility.

During WW II American citizens were called upon to actually sacrifice to help towards the war effort. ... Even Hollywood lent their talents to support the cause. We are not called upon today to sacrifice much, .....

I find this a sad truth, that if we are not called upon by a higher authority, then we often feel that it is not our problem and we do nothing about it. I think that we as artists should do something, positive, constructive and move from idea to deed to motivate and precipitate change.

Blake