Цитата:
Сообщение от K-Maler
It would be nice now such remeslinnikov.Vasha extremely interesting article, but ... Determined yet - the art is a philosophical statement here in a way that whenever a certain world view. I refer to Aristotle - it is "not for profit" ... Those whom you call the artisans would understand the world and man's place in the world, and not fulfill shkolyarskuyu Studies for things like images ...
|
Each word, there are many values, and his interpretations more, but above all it must be understood in the context of the foregoing. The essence remains such that before the nineteenth century, the paintings depicted the nature and people such as they were in reality and what was the exact copy of this - the better. It is on this main feature of the artist emphasizes the word "artisans". From the word I can refuse, but from the point - no. Thank you for your comment
[color="# 666686"]Posted by 46 minutes[/color]
Цитата:
Сообщение от Amateur
I think that the evolution of fine art is not influenced by physics and other sciences in themselves, and their practical results. It is unlikely then the artist versed in the best physical description of the picture of the world such as the theory of relativity, quantum mechanics, etc.
|
I would say to another: a revolution in art influenced the evolution
This however, on the other. Often you can find arguments that contemporary art - it is supposedly not an art at all, or too far from the fact that just now. And what would such disputes were to be understood that the art before the twentieth century - is the art of image outside, and contemporary art - an art image of his spiritual world. In other words, it's different qualities akin karpuskulam and waves, matter and Spirit. Talking about what one is better and more significant simply makes no sense. Karpuskulyarno wave-particle duality in the art - is an inextricable link and integration of past and contemporary art, art external and internal. From the apparent contradiction - to harmony. In physics, recognized the objective existence of "two in one" as a third thing, though long argued that there are elementary particles - karpuskula or wave? It turned out that this "something" completely different, having karpuskulyarno wave-particle duality. In art, in my opinion, is yet to be targeted at. That "something" still in its infancy.
[color="# 666686"]Posted 2 hours 14 minutes[/color]
Цитата:
Сообщение от Amateur
I was about 15 years to hit and has since been etched in the memory of the painting Burliuk "Atom" from the magazine "America" somewhere in 1970 (the painting itself is in the Metropolitan-Museum). She wrote, as I recall, in purple tones, dated 1911 year, but it shows the (conditional, of course) and the orbital electrons and the nucleus of an atom. But the orbital model of the atom was first proposed by Niels Bohr and justified only in 1912! How ...?
|
Planetary model of the atom was proposed Rozerfordom in 1911.