Last edited Thu Aug 23, 2012, 08:56 AM - Edit history (1)
He didn't have Myopia in any way shape or form.
There are always badly formed theories by "scientists" who have no conception of what it takes to Master the art and craft of painting. Or seemingly, why artists make the creative choices they do.
In science, parameters are set by the scientific method. You have to play the hand you are given when dealing with materials, effects, processes. (...supposedly. Though if you read any history regarding science you'll find them to be as small minded, territorial and fundamentalist as any other group of people and hence very prone to "affecting" the outcome of their experiments), but artists are under no such constraints. Their job is to break the rules or play with new ones while maintaining a set of self imposed parameters.
A scientist can't just make up the outcome he wants (though many do), but that is exactly what the artist does. -I want to make a painting using mostly yellow and red and I'll use that field I saw last week as a template.- An artist works out the outcome, then experiments with how to get there. A scientist devises an experiment to see where it leads.
Rather than trying to "demysitify" art by stripping the artists of their Mastery due to some random physical circumstance, why don't scientist actually learn what artists think and do before publishing such trivial nonsense?
= new reply since forum marked as read