Well it really has been the doldrums around here. I like this word – and its defintion “an unhappy listlessness” and the alternative seafaring meaning its much better than “The Intertropical Convergence Zone” isn’t it?
As I have said, I am a collector by nature (others may say its OCD) and I also collect words. Frame’s book has got me pondering words even more. I came across ‘resplendance’ the other day and an associated poem by Mark Young. “There/is a colour/ that moves” – wonderful stuff. I was thinking of this in terms of a Milan Mrkusich painting I saw in Elva Betts “New Zealand Art: A Modern Perspective” today. Also Dragan Stojanovic’s work. Of course they don’t show up well on the web but there is definitely movement there.
Bought a small print today as I need some focus for some work I am doing. I don’t know if its art – so much symbolism maybe its simply illustration. But I was looking for symbolism – it was a purchase requirement. There seem to be some who object to symbolism in art – not sure why that is. Isn’t art in itself symbolic? And so we are back to that old “what is art?” question.
I’ll give a little example. Here is the type of work that inspires “that’s not art” comments. Saw it at Te Papa a while back. Didn’t hate it, didn’t love it. My then-4-year-old was mesmerised and drew pictures of it ‘talking’ to her for days after. Maybe she ‘got it’?
Well the brain is a fried after finally getting out an academic article for peer review. I think tomorrow as a treat I need to resurrect some art work from the Tardis (my garage). They say you don’t know a work until you live with it for a while, so for me when its gone, I miss it like a absent friend.
Question for the day: Labour appears to have done a lot for the arts over their term in government – what was it like under National?