Posted by: Jim in Pyramids, Mystery, Engineering, Egypt on
Sep 06, 2008
As reported by Petrie, in his classic book from the 1800's on the Pyramids, the equisite detail and painstaking pursuit of perfection make these constructions both inspiring and enigmatic. A quote from the book.
" Hence the mean thickness of the joints there is '020'; therefore the mean variation of the cuttting of the stone from a straight line and from a true square, is but '01 on lenght of 75 inches up the face, an amount of accuracy equal to most modern opticians' straight edges of such a lenth."
It is inspiring because it shows what can be achieved with care and attention to detail. It is enigmatic when one wonders why it was considered necessary to dress the stones to this degree of accurracy and how it was done on a such a large scale over a prolonged period of time. Working with businesses today, as a consultant, I can report that to have employees apply themselves consistently over a period as short as one day is an issue. So as we go deeper into the mystery of these monuments we find even more unanswsered questions.
The idea of coherence relates to an instant tuning together of all of the parts of a painting. Nature as we know is not automatically coherent. It is chaotic at the visual level. It is therefore one of the key objectives of the watercolor artist to use the concept of coherence to create a 'whole' unified painting. Therefore to create a 'forever painting' the idea of choerence must necessarily play a dominant role. Many paintings seem coherent on one level but fail to meet that standard on all levels. It is not enough to merely use technique to force coherence at the painting stage. It must be built in at the design, story and painting levels. These to me represent the three most important areas for a watercolor painter to use. It is much like the design build concepts used in the construction industry. First we design and then we build or render. To have too little thought on the front end(design/ story leaves too much to chance. While chance plays an important and much recognized role in watercolor painting it should not be the principle design strategy in an intentional painting. In a non intentional spontaneous painting one could lauch forth with 'chance' as the key strategy but in the end the artist must bring coherence into play if the painting is to succeed.
Posted by: Jim in Philosophy, Painting on
Aug 26, 2008
You can't start with nature and end up with a forever painting. You will not find that 'something more' in nature as it is only a symbol for beauty that you seek. As a symbol it can point toward the higher but does not contain it. That is why so many watercolor paintings fail to reach the 'forever painting' level. They are nice renderings but contain less and not more than nature. They become of a symbol of the symbol. They are lower and not higher because the artist started with the wrong point of view. To reach the higher level requires a differnt point of view. This is a point of view that comes from within the artist and is imposed upon the subject matter. Therefore don't look for or expect to find your 'something more' in nature, or for that matter any part of the material world. Look within and there you will find the hidden treasure that you have been seeking.
Carrying the message 'strongly' in a painting is one of the key goals of a watercolor painter. One should never struggle too long over a weak depiction. The key is to begin over if the inital attempt appears to be too weak because in painting the stage must be set early for success.
Posted by: Jim in Philosophy, Painting on
Aug 11, 2008
Rodin once said that the artist had to recognize and point out things of significance. Some think that the artist selects them, points them out and reveals the inner truth of the 'significant' to the world. Some think that the artists job is to show the significance of all things to the world. I agree with the latter and think it is a far greater challenge but more rewarding in the end.
Posted by: Jim in Philosophy, Painting on
Aug 08, 2008
As C.S. Lewis once put it, "Nature is only the sketch." It is what we see as an image of the beauty that lies behind it. It points to the far off territory beyond from whence it all arises. It is the beauty of this far off territory that the watercolorist seeks to point toward. To suggest in some poetic fashion that true beauty lies beyond the surface of nature is possible in watercolor and the painting structures utilized by the watercolorist.
Posted by: Jim in Astronomy on
Aug 07, 2008
The new Large Synoptic Survey Telescope will be creating a new picture of the entire heavens every 3 days. In the past the space artists, such as Bonstell, lead the way with intuitive renderings that helped to promote and popularize space. How will this role change in the age or tera and petra bytes of information? . Will the artists continue to lead or merely to render likenesses in dramatic fashion? I prefer the idea of leading and transparent watercolor to me is the best medium to do so
Posted by: Jim in Mars on
Jun 16, 2008
Is it important whether or not we find specific evidence of water on Mars? I think not. We have substantial evidence that Mars was once a planet that had quite a bit of water. So if we find water what would we do about it? What would it change in regards to our present space program or the pace of space exploration? I think nothing.
The fact that we successfully accomplished this part of the mission is probably more important than if we find water locked up in the form of ice on the planet. I think it was exciting but the recent U.S. Open and NBA Plyoffs got more television viewing and coverge time than this latest space venture.
So as a nation we must not share the common dream and aspiration for space exploration. In level of importance and interest it does not capture the minds and hearts of the majority of citizens. Herein lies the key issue to be addressed.
If it is that important then we need the leadership that can sell that vision. I think that it is the lack of these common visions of the future that is at issue here and not if we find or don't find water on Mars.
If we don't find water will it deter us from eventually going to the planet with a manned mission? No. So why did we spend so much money in pursuit of the water question? It beats me!
Posted by: Jim in X Prize, Moon on
May 20, 2008
AA recent article in Popular Mechanics covered the criteria and goals of the Moon X Prize. While interesting they do not require that the rover do any science which is one item that I think they left off of the qualifying critieria for winning the prize. Like the Apollo program they have overlooked the key element or reason for going to the moon which is to learn more about ourselves and our origins. If they had added the necessity for some type of meaningful and successful scientific experiment they would have increased the value of the effort and the prize expotentially. This is not to suggest that having an amateur or private group actually get a rover to the moon is not a challenge but with a science package on board it would have more depth and meaning.
Posted by: Jim in Moon on
May 18, 2008
A recent article in Popular Mechanics discussed the idea of private property rights for the Moon. I for one am in favor as it has been shown historically that it enhances progress and protection. The individual has always been the primary force behind development and protection. Wheter it is in hte arts or sciences the individual comes first as he or she has the internal creative power and built in moral imperative that has seen to best address the needs of new territiores and discoveries. As my previous post regarding the greening of Mars indicates we need a new set of visions for space and privatizing the Moon is one of them. It is man's job to be both a developer and a steward and that does not end with the earth.
Blog 
