4 ms·

But nobody noticed. In that case, some early Islamic artist is probably "the true pioneer." And they were well known. Also: how can I take an article seriously

by tgv 4y ago

But nobody noticed. In that case, some early Islamic artist is probably "the true pioneer." And they were well known. Also: how can I take an article seriously, if it writes "As a clairvoyant and mystic, ..." Are they really claiming Af Klint had supernatural powers?

inopinatus 4y ago
- Daub 4y ago
  Actually, from reading the article, it seems yes. I have a vested interest in this era of European art. At the time, Colour science was torn between the empirical (Newton, Chevreul) and mad-ass angry mystics like Goethe and Itten. The later did nothing but obfuscate the truth, and threw mus at anyone of opposing views. In the end the latter won, and their muddled teachings have reigned supreme in art schools ever since.
  - inopinatus 4y ago
    - Daub 4y ago
    - dang 4y ago
      Can you please stop posting unsubstantive comments? We're hoping for something else here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
      - inopinatus 4y ago
        It’s a wry and pithy comment. Sorry dang, you’re in the weeds on this one. The article simply doesn’t say that this artist had supernatural powers. The bizarre misreading otherwise is a mixture of magical and rigid thinking, or possibly poor English comprehension. However, there’s nothing substantive about speculating upon what goes on in someone’s head. Sometimes “no” is the correct and complete answer.
        dang 4y ago
        This isn't about supernatural powers, it's about low-quality internet comments. We're against them. The comment was obviously unsubstantive regardless of how "wry and pithy" it felt to you. You've been posting other ones in other threads too, which is why my request was in the plural.
        inopinatus 4y ago
        If you mean these similarly brief recent remarks: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33208546 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33208546 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33208557 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33208557 then I must contend that these were flagged by the humourless mediocrity police, a tribe I discarded any respect for at least three decades ago.
        dang 4y ago
        I don't recall if I had those comments in mind, but yes, they're examples of low-quality comment. The problem with stuff like that is that everyone overestimates how funny their jokes are. Mostly they're just lame. The gold standard HN explanation about this was by scott_s many years ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7609289 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7609289
        deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
  - biztos 4y ago
    I'd already read that Goethe was a bit touchy about his color theory and that it was basically wrong, but I somehow missed this about Itten. When I was in school, Itten and Albers were the color-theory heroes. Where can I learn about the mad-ass angry part?
    - Daub 4y ago
      > Where can I learn about the mad-ass angry part? Bruce MacEvay know more about colour theory and history than any man alive: https://www.handprint.com/HP/WCL/wcolor.html https://www.handprint.com/HP/WCL/wcolor.html Also Color space and its divisions (Kuehni, R. G. 2001) will help you tell the difference between up and down in the color domain (not an easy task in the world of colour). My own thoughts... Goethe's full text of his `Colour Theory' is effectively a hate letter to Newton. However, that part of the book is rarely translated into English. Generally, that whole bunch of romantics/spiritualists brought nothing but fuzziness to the subject of color theory in art. For example, in ‘Concerning the Spiritual in Art’ Kandinsky remarked that `orange is red brought nearer to humanity by yellow'. Goethe described the colour ‘yellow-red’ as being a favorite of `savage nations' and `impetuous, robust and uneducated men' and Itten himself describes the colours of a stained glass window as offering a `...direct invitation to higher spirituality'. Lovely words, but of little application to confused art students. The problem with that hot-head Goethe is that he misunderstood a lot of what Newton was saying. Newton was addressing the physics of colour, whilst Goethe was addressing its application. These (generally) involve two different colour spaces defined by two different sets of antagonistic pairs (RGB/subtractive/light for Newton and RYB/additive/paint for Goethe). These two different ways of understanding the same thing are difficult to reconcile. For example, in RGB black is an absence of light, whilst for the painter's RYB space it is an active element. Goethe is often credited with discovering the physiological dimensions of colour (that one colour can influence our perception of another). In fact it was Newton, though he did not pursue it very deeply. Goethe had a massive influence on the way art and colour is addressed and I don't believe that art schools will ever recover from that. However, I still respect Goethe for his obsessive approach to the subject. Itten, on the other hand, is a whole bucket of shit. His set of contrasts developed out of his teaching, and he was the living embodiment of a bad art teacher. You have been to art school I guess... you know the type. Charismatic, cultish and mistaken. He required all his students to be vegetarians, and to practice calisthtics at the beginning of class. Unsurprisingly, was a proponent of Mazdaznanism, which was a fire cult. There are many errors and inconsistencies in his work. For example, in his book `The Art of Colour' he describes yellow as being ‘lighter’ than blue. This is clearly erroneous, as lightness is independent from hue, and any hue has the potential to be lighter than any other hue. What he is responding to is that the maximum saturation of yellow is reached at a lower lightness value than (for example) blue or green. The annoying thing is that in the same book he recognizes HSL as being the three perceptual dimensions of color! I could fill a book with other mistakes he made. You mention Albers. He is someone I have a lot of respect for. Goethe and Itten tried to construct general theories on the subject. Albers was more humble. His book `Interaction of Color' was a set of thoughtful observations, as indeed was his whole body of work 'Homage to the Square'.
mongol 4y ago
Does clairvoyant means she had supernatural powers, or that she claimed she had?
- tgv 4y ago
  The dictionary is clear (*): being clairvoyant means having the faculty. The journalist either didn't want to write that she only claimed it, or believes in it. Neither should pass fact checking. (*) not that that should matter. If we read "It was the best-attended show in the history of that institution", should we assume it wasn't, but someone had been saying that for private reasons? Does "Born in Stockholm in 1862" mean that she might have been born in Malmö in 1920?
  - inopinatus 4y ago
    This is misrepresenting the article, which is clearly relaying the artist’s self-belief and identity, not trying to claim that the artist objectively had supernatural powers. Hence “As a clairvoyant and mystic,” which is a recognition of spiritual belief, and identical to any generic “As a <believer in specific religion>” in format. Much like writing, “As a musician”, does not actually specify any actual musical talent. They could be really terrible at it. In fact this describes much of the music industry. The very same sentence then goes to on to confirm that it is entirely about the artist’s beliefs: “Af Klint believed that her abstracts were painted under the direction of higher spirits.” Occam’s razor, people.
    - tgv 4y ago
      > not trying to claim Indeed, but that wasn't the point. The point was the journalist says Af Klint is clairvoyant, or doesn't want to write "self-proclaimed clairvoyant", possibly out of fear of damaging Af Klint's image. > The very same sentence then goes to on to confirm Nonsense. "As a movie star, Garbo believed ...". That doesn't say Garbo only believes she's a movie star. The construction doesn't warrant that interpretation. > “As a musician” So, everyone is a clairvoyant, just a very bad one. Well, why add it then to the list of features that have to be mentioned? Plus, it still accepts that clairvoyance is real. > As a <believer in specific religion> Look: it has believer in it, literally, unlike "musician" or "clairvoyant". If you now say "but I meant a word like Catholic", then indeed: the common interpretation for a Catholic is a believer (there's another meaning, but that doesn't matter in this context). You can even check current online discussions about witches: people explicitly differentiate between witches and those who believe they are witches. And don't you dare say the latter to someone who believes (s)he's a witch: it suggests they're delusional. It's counter-factual journalism in an article to whip up public interest for a click-bait-y art historian.

by tgv 4y ago

inopinatus 4y ago

Daub 4y ago
Actually, from reading the article, it seems yes. I have a vested interest in this era of European art. At the time, Colour science was torn between the empirical (Newton, Chevreul) and mad-ass angry mystics like Goethe and Itten. The later did nothing but obfuscate the truth, and threw mus at anyone of opposing views. In the end the latter won, and their muddled teachings have reigned supreme in art schools ever since.
- inopinatus 4y ago
  - Daub 4y ago
  - dang 4y ago
    Can you please stop posting unsubstantive comments? We're hoping for something else here. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
    - inopinatus 4y ago
      It’s a wry and pithy comment. Sorry dang, you’re in the weeds on this one. The article simply doesn’t say that this artist had supernatural powers. The bizarre misreading otherwise is a mixture of magical and rigid thinking, or possibly poor English comprehension. However, there’s nothing substantive about speculating upon what goes on in someone’s head. Sometimes “no” is the correct and complete answer.
      - dang 4y ago
        This isn't about supernatural powers, it's about low-quality internet comments. We're against them. The comment was obviously unsubstantive regardless of how "wry and pithy" it felt to you. You've been posting other ones in other threads too, which is why my request was in the plural.
        inopinatus 4y ago
        If you mean these similarly brief recent remarks: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33208546 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33208546 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33208557 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33208557 then I must contend that these were flagged by the humourless mediocrity police, a tribe I discarded any respect for at least three decades ago.
        dang 4y ago
        I don't recall if I had those comments in mind, but yes, they're examples of low-quality comment. The problem with stuff like that is that everyone overestimates how funny their jokes are. Mostly they're just lame. The gold standard HN explanation about this was by scott_s many years ago: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7609289 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=7609289
        deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
- biztos 4y ago
  I'd already read that Goethe was a bit touchy about his color theory and that it was basically wrong, but I somehow missed this about Itten. When I was in school, Itten and Albers were the color-theory heroes. Where can I learn about the mad-ass angry part?
  - Daub 4y ago
    > Where can I learn about the mad-ass angry part? Bruce MacEvay know more about colour theory and history than any man alive: https://www.handprint.com/HP/WCL/wcolor.html https://www.handprint.com/HP/WCL/wcolor.html Also Color space and its divisions (Kuehni, R. G. 2001) will help you tell the difference between up and down in the color domain (not an easy task in the world of colour). My own thoughts... Goethe's full text of his `Colour Theory' is effectively a hate letter to Newton. However, that part of the book is rarely translated into English. Generally, that whole bunch of romantics/spiritualists brought nothing but fuzziness to the subject of color theory in art. For example, in ‘Concerning the Spiritual in Art’ Kandinsky remarked that `orange is red brought nearer to humanity by yellow'. Goethe described the colour ‘yellow-red’ as being a favorite of `savage nations' and `impetuous, robust and uneducated men' and Itten himself describes the colours of a stained glass window as offering a `...direct invitation to higher spirituality'. Lovely words, but of little application to confused art students. The problem with that hot-head Goethe is that he misunderstood a lot of what Newton was saying. Newton was addressing the physics of colour, whilst Goethe was addressing its application. These (generally) involve two different colour spaces defined by two different sets of antagonistic pairs (RGB/subtractive/light for Newton and RYB/additive/paint for Goethe). These two different ways of understanding the same thing are difficult to reconcile. For example, in RGB black is an absence of light, whilst for the painter's RYB space it is an active element. Goethe is often credited with discovering the physiological dimensions of colour (that one colour can influence our perception of another). In fact it was Newton, though he did not pursue it very deeply. Goethe had a massive influence on the way art and colour is addressed and I don't believe that art schools will ever recover from that. However, I still respect Goethe for his obsessive approach to the subject. Itten, on the other hand, is a whole bucket of shit. His set of contrasts developed out of his teaching, and he was the living embodiment of a bad art teacher. You have been to art school I guess... you know the type. Charismatic, cultish and mistaken. He required all his students to be vegetarians, and to practice calisthtics at the beginning of class. Unsurprisingly, was a proponent of Mazdaznanism, which was a fire cult. There are many errors and inconsistencies in his work. For example, in his book `The Art of Colour' he describes yellow as being ‘lighter’ than blue. This is clearly erroneous, as lightness is independent from hue, and any hue has the potential to be lighter than any other hue. What he is responding to is that the maximum saturation of yellow is reached at a lower lightness value than (for example) blue or green. The annoying thing is that in the same book he recognizes HSL as being the three perceptual dimensions of color! I could fill a book with other mistakes he made. You mention Albers. He is someone I have a lot of respect for. Goethe and Itten tried to construct general theories on the subject. Albers was more humble. His book `Interaction of Color' was a set of thoughtful observations, as indeed was his whole body of work 'Homage to the Square'.

mongol 4y ago

Does clairvoyant means she had supernatural powers, or that she claimed she had?

tgv 4y ago
The dictionary is clear (*): being clairvoyant means having the faculty. The journalist either didn't want to write that she only claimed it, or believes in it. Neither should pass fact checking. (*) not that that should matter. If we read "It was the best-attended show in the history of that institution", should we assume it wasn't, but someone had been saying that for private reasons? Does "Born in Stockholm in 1862" mean that she might have been born in Malmö in 1920?
- inopinatus 4y ago
  This is misrepresenting the article, which is clearly relaying the artist’s self-belief and identity, not trying to claim that the artist objectively had supernatural powers. Hence “As a clairvoyant and mystic,” which is a recognition of spiritual belief, and identical to any generic “As a <believer in specific religion>” in format. Much like writing, “As a musician”, does not actually specify any actual musical talent. They could be really terrible at it. In fact this describes much of the music industry. The very same sentence then goes to on to confirm that it is entirely about the artist’s beliefs: “Af Klint believed that her abstracts were painted under the direction of higher spirits.” Occam’s razor, people.
  - tgv 4y ago
    > not trying to claim Indeed, but that wasn't the point. The point was the journalist says Af Klint is clairvoyant, or doesn't want to write "self-proclaimed clairvoyant", possibly out of fear of damaging Af Klint's image. > The very same sentence then goes to on to confirm Nonsense. "As a movie star, Garbo believed ...". That doesn't say Garbo only believes she's a movie star. The construction doesn't warrant that interpretation. > “As a musician” So, everyone is a clairvoyant, just a very bad one. Well, why add it then to the list of features that have to be mentioned? Plus, it still accepts that clairvoyance is real. > As a <believer in specific religion> Look: it has believer in it, literally, unlike "musician" or "clairvoyant". If you now say "but I meant a word like Catholic", then indeed: the common interpretation for a Catholic is a believer (there's another meaning, but that doesn't matter in this context). You can even check current online discussions about witches: people explicitly differentiate between witches and those who believe they are witches. And don't you dare say the latter to someone who believes (s)he's a witch: it suggests they're delusional. It's counter-factual journalism in an article to whip up public interest for a click-bait-y art historian.