Having your art and opinions prominently on the web leaves you open to response from all kinds of creeps. Most response has been positive and coherent. This is the response I got recently from being a MetaTools Spotlight Artist. The black print is my own narrative of the matter, the red is his e-mail, and the blue is my responses to his e-mails. Third party names have been changed to protect the guilty. Hey Folks, I have come this way via Metatools. Two responses- The first is that your art is worthy of many praises. The second is that a fertile mind is likened to a fresh piece of clay. It is pliable and limitless. On the other hand, clay that has been exposed to air and debris carries with it the callus scars of insensitivity. Again, the art is great- Leo Hass I received the above message and thought, well, whatever, I guess it's a compliment about my art, but what is that stuff about the clay? What is this guy trying to say? That I'm crusty? What? I pretty much ignored it, but the very next time I checked my e-mail was the following: I have a third response sparked by the comments in reference to "Spaceboy" landscapes.(He is referring to an entry I used to have in my Ann-aesthetics page) As depicted in your art you have a very linear way of perceiving the world. You face a wall and decorate it with beautifully colorful patterns and wonderful forms of light and shadow. Yet as intricate and elegant as the wall may be it is still a wall. It is a flat obstacle with limited depth of maybe two or three layers. There is so much to see beyond the beautiful walls you have spent so much time creating. Leo Hass OK, this was strange. One e-mail wasn't enough. And what was all this oblique pseudo-poetic pop-psychology analysis writing alluding to? Why doesn't he just come right out and say something, rather than being so cryptic? Not only that, receiving a second e-mail before I could even respond to the first was like being a kid when you were sent to room after doing something bad and your dad would come back after you were shut in there and explode saying, "And another thing, young lady!..." So I responded: Yeah, when I want to look at other things, I look at them, not at pictures of them. What is your point? Are you implying art that is beautiful is shallow? That I need to *put more of myself* in my art? I've heard that one before. I do what I do because that's what I want to do, not to find some so-called deep truth in life. If that makes me shallow in turn, fine. I'm shallow. At least I won't drown trying to be profound. --Ann And Stan, bless his heart, gave me the idea for a response to the first e-mail: Mr. Bill was made of clay. :o --Ann Mr. Bill? (The guy has never seen Saturday Night Live's famous Mr. Bill? Maybe he's too much of a high cultured snob that he won't admit it even if he has) Art students tend to be very sensitive. Their art is very precious and not unlike a physical body part. (A body part! [LOL]) It is often the case that artists receive recognition for their art as they grow up. They get into college and suddenly all that matters is development. This does not sit well for many because they are no longer treated as though they are special (and already perfect). Instead it all becomes academic. The idea is to separate from your art at some point just as a parent should from a child. It is the best thing for the child and the parent. It is imperative to becoming a mature adult. Most teachers do not have time for your emotional needs. They can only do so much with so many people. It is a matter of tossing out a pile of raw meat and letting the wolves fend for themselves amongst the pack. It is not healthy to expect special attention as an adult. Besides people are often given special attention because they are perceived as weak and needing that extra boost. Your strength may be the enemy in disguise. People draw in what they need unconsciously and inspite of their desires. Whatever you experience is unique. Another might interpret it all completely different. It is a case of a chicken and an egg. Perhaps your teachers sense(d) your attitude and write you off after you demonstrate(d) it. (He might be referring to an anti-art graduate school writing on one of my pages. I'm not sure) Yes, you do what you do because you do (something like that). Profundity is not necessary, however, there is a quantum leap from mere design to that of true art that is available. I am not implying nor outright stating what category I think you fall in. Everyone does what they do because they do but things continue doing after the doing is done by some (this sentence does actually make plenty of sense). (Sure it does.) Art can be created that takes on a life of its own to be experienced by the observer. There are as many reasons for choosing a subject as there are paintings painted. To think linearly is not shallow. To paint a wall can be both metaphorical and interestingly literal. The process of life is spacial not linear though. Only the organization of life is linear. Not to be pegged in the lump category of Spaceboy Artist/Fan I do not look for wishful evidence of extraterrestrial life. I do feel a multifaceted transcendence of emotion and spirit in addition to visual stimulation in many pieces. There is a universe of information in all expression whether it be through verbage, text, song, drawings, dance, painting, sculpture or you name the form. It is not a subliminal message of great profundity that makes art more than mere design. It is the formless catalyst embedded by the soul of the artist triggering multidimensional experiences in the observer. 80%-95% of computer generated art is design. At that level the medium shines like never before. Only a small portion achieves the level of true art.(Hey, fellow digi-artists, aren't you glad to hear that?) Leo Hass Blah. I'm tired of flowery art speak. Is this guy an artist himself? a professor? a professional critic? Does he have art on the web that he would like to share? Where is his URL? So many questions, but . . . I really don't care, since all he wants to do is analyze me. I do not wish to continue a one-sided conversation with someone who thinks they know me when they really haven't a clue about me. Find someone else to preach to, or some other artist on the web to harrass. There's millions of young art students out there who need to hear your message, at least for the laugh. -A. It has been your cynicism and sarcasm that has been one-sided. (Excuse me?) I took you up on your invitation designed into your web page to engage in conversations on the topics you introduced. (I may have solicited conversations about art, not conversations analyzing my psychological make-up, buddy, especially false analysis) If you are put on the defense because I see things in you that you do not wish to discuss (LOL) even as remote concepts then go on living in your preconcluded life. I do not claim to know you. You can "preach" your experience of grad school very one-sided in a web page yet you are not interested in another point of view that sees it differently. There is nothing to laugh about that. (OOooh, Mr. Serious) Take Care Well, I guess two can play at the pop-psychology game: I guess this guy 1) Is jealous he's not a MetaTools spotlight artist, 2) Hates women, 3) Is really scary because not once does he offer anything other than pop-psychology, and offers no insight about his own experience with graduate school, which he seems to feel he has the authority the talk about. Although I should have just ignored this e-mail, I let him have it. Look, I get these OBTUSE e-mails and I wonder "what the heck is this guy talking about?" So I write back and a few e-mails later I find out this is his attempt to tell his own opinion about graduate school. Why didn't you just come out and say from your first letter "This is what happened to me in graduate school, which was a very different experience than yours, and I think blah blah blah?" How the heck am I supposed to know what's going on from all that lump of clay allusions and linearity references? Maybe you're hiding the fact that you never did have any personal experience with it, but you just want to start an argument for the sake of starting an argument. Annie don't play that. (Whomp) (If he's not seen SNL's Mr. Bill, I guess it is rather a stretch to expect him to have seen In Living Color's Homey the Clown) I may be ranting against the institution of graduate school, which is very impersonal, but you are making direct suppositions about me which are untrue. And my views of graduate school aren't one-sided. I have talked to many people with equally bad experiences. In fact, I personally do not know one person who had a good time, or felt that they had even a quality time, in graduate school. If you'll excuse me, I have to get back to my so-called pre-concluded life. And I'll let you get back to your practice as a new age pop-psychologist. The Aesthetic Pharmacist prescribes a good dose of sarcasm for you, followed up with a chaser of cynicism. And cut down on the bloated poetic hyperbole, as it makes for confusing e-mail. http://www.voyagerco.com/gg/ (The Geurilla Girls' homepage) Ann, You do have a way with twisting things around so that you can conveniently play victim. THAT is what Annie plays. ("Whomp"). Try looking from the top out instead of the bottom up. I do not wish to continue this interaction. (Good riddance!!!!!!) This guy obviously hates women.

 

 

Choose another topic

~ Virtual ~ Free ~ Personal ~ Interlinks ~ Contact ~ Home ~

Entire site designed by Ann Stretton © 1996-98.
Graphics by The S.S.Studio.

 I Am A Proud Member Of:

Phenomenal Women Of The Web