close deceased influences

[Norma Desmond]

No, not just the wikipedia example. There are two more links about a well thought-out

and respected exhibition on the influence of Picasso on American artists. I attended it

when it was at the Whitney and it was quite compelling. It was also well received when it

was here in San Francisco. It gave visual examples of paintings, side by side, making

obvious the influences and homages.

 

The one example, without a link, you gave was DaVinci and I presented some pretty solid

counterexamples to show that he was quite more influenced than you surmised. You didn't

respond to those counterexamples and you haven't actually presented any solid evidence

or examples of your point of view, as far as I can tell. I would absolutely be interested in

the presentation of a non-influenced artist. My guess is that some can be found and it

would be enlightening, although a minority of artists. I can think of Mozart, who was a

child prodigy, but even his father was a court musician which I imagine influenced him

much.

[Allen Herbert]

his father was a court musician which I imagine influenced him much.

 

Fred,nobody on this forum is argueing about influences...just the degeee of that influence. Back to semantics.

[Norma Desmond]

Actually, back to a lack of examples on your part.

[Allen Herbert]

Call me thick, Fred. But what do you actually mean by "direct influence"?

 

I feel that we are going around in a never ending circle. I've disappeared up my arse on several occasions and popped out of my own mouth. I've tried to talk in parables for greater understanding like the great man himself...all to no avail. My mate, John, bless his little white cotton socks, has been stuck in a never ending dictionary with no way out.

 

I decided to hide under my bed until all this confusion goes away.

 

Think i might write a book.

[Norma Desmond]

Allen, I can see where the example of Leopold's influence on Wolfgang would be

somewhat less than satisfactory. It was a quick thought on my part. So check out the

article below on the more direct and intentional influence that Bach and Haydn had on

Mozart's music. Mozart wanted and sought out that influence. He was confident enough to

know that that wouldn't make him either mindless or dependent. Mozart was a creative

genius who owes much to Bach and who also responded directly and musically to Haydn.

That is more the kind of blatant and deep influence that I'm suggesting goes on all the

time. Mozart actually transcribed Bach's fugues with the express purpose of understanding

them in order to use what they had to offer in his own compositions. He was stimulated by

having musical dialogues with Haydn as were Chopin and Lizst dazzled by and happy to

emulate aspects of each others' playing and composing. These are not solitary geniuses,

alone with their independent creativity. They are artists happy to engage others' art, to

learn from it, to respond to it, to mimic it, play with it, recognize its importance, relate to it

historically, be surrounded by it socially, and, yes, also break away from it once they

absorbed it. That, to me, is so much the story of art.

 

http://www.schillerinstitute.org/music/m_rasmus_801.html

[pnital]

"They are artists happy to engage others' art, to learn from it, to respond to it, to mimic it, play with it, recognize its importance, relate to it historically, be surrounded by it socially, and, yes, also break away from it once they absorbed it. That, to me, is so much the story of art"

 

Fred,

 

you have sumed up what I would call a DIALOGUE! as a starting point, to understand and absorb what was created before, and THAN, break from it , fully( mostly not) or in part ,to ones own way of expression. I think it is the best way to find your own voice , as a continuation,/ conjunction /innovation / point of view, with previous generation. An artist's creating work, will be a NEW chapter in the long "book" full of previous chapters, which are called the history of the arts .

 

As I wrote before,I think that a good work of art is not created in an "empty space" , be it in writting, visual, or any other form.

[jtk]

Allen, I don't see where anybody accused you of anything.

 

You don't seem any more of an extremist than you have repeatedly asserted, and your extreme seems the average here.

 

You're wrong in the absolute sense about the existence of "words" in your images.

 

Your words (labels) are superficially pasted-on, you've reduced the images to illustrations (good ones)...as in a text book. Your rich images would offer a lot more on their own: you've dumbed them down with Dymo labels.

[Allen Herbert]

you've dumbed them down with Dymo labels

 

A good thought to take onboard,John.

[aplumpton]

"Close deceased influences" is not quite the same as "deceased influences", which

most of the above cite as examples.

 

A modern writer may be influenced by deceased ancient Greek writers or a

contemporary scientist may be influenced by the thought processes of a Newton or a

Descartes. This is what education is meant to contribute to the life of a creative

person. "Close deceased influences" speaks to me more of the influences of someone

one has known, which if I am not mistaken was the original theme of this post?

[jtk]

Arthur, you're right..and you described some of your close deceased...

[aplumpton]

One or two generations back, John.