tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9064353933668888339.post4790958894713202554..comments2024-03-13T00:11:38.615-04:00Comments on Art in the Studio: The Platonic Ideal of EncausticNancy Natalehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03325421420384484035noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9064353933668888339.post-80498949374728266272013-01-26T22:07:17.002-05:002013-01-26T22:07:17.002-05:00This is a tricky thing. I understand both points o...This is a tricky thing. I understand both points of view, yours and the critics. Content and form should be one. There are certain inherent properties to encaustic that avail it to certain types of expression. If one isn't going to exploit the properties of the chosen medium then why use it? I think the critic was too harsh, but has a point as do you. Why does it matter what is used if it is only the expression if the image that matters to the artist? U are correct, it doesn't. But if the focus of the show is the materials used than I can see why the critic was disappointed that the beauty of the encaustic material wasn't allowed to be felt and seen. Instead it became a slave to the imagery. The form (encaustic paint) had nothing to do with the content of the imagery so why use it? That was his point. Your thought seem to be "because they wanted to" but the paintings would be just as strong if they were oil or acrylic so perhatshirt show should not have made a big deal about it being encaustics as that appears to be superfluous to the work. Mary Moquinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00630971597000944859noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9064353933668888339.post-74270212387129260052009-05-22T09:28:36.315-04:002009-05-22T09:28:36.315-04:00Hey, thank you Nancy, I appreciate you sticking up...Hey, thank you Nancy, I appreciate you sticking up for the show and doing such research ~christine sajeckihttp://www.csajecki.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9064353933668888339.post-21190426424835884192009-05-13T01:16:00.000-04:002009-05-13T01:16:00.000-04:00Whoops! Guess my Platonic ideal of a critic was ma...Whoops! Guess my Platonic ideal of a critic was male.Nancy Natalehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03325421420384484035noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9064353933668888339.post-57019456404481384462009-05-11T16:36:00.000-04:002009-05-11T16:36:00.000-04:00thanks a lot for the thoughts, Nancy. note that Al...thanks a lot for the thoughts, Nancy. note that Alex Ebstein is a woman.Joseph Younghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00272494703255020588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9064353933668888339.post-52872592282248112772009-05-11T00:04:00.000-04:002009-05-11T00:04:00.000-04:00Thanks for your comment, SS. ...or of the artist!Thanks for your comment, SS. ...or of the artist!Nancy Natalehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03325421420384484035noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9064353933668888339.post-63839867932501086152009-05-09T01:48:00.000-04:002009-05-09T01:48:00.000-04:00Good post, Nancy.
I hope you'll send the critic a...Good post, Nancy. <br />I hope you'll send the critic a link to your blog because as you point out, the only "limitations" of encaustic are in the thinking of the critic him/herself.joannehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11810391282961989002noreply@blogger.com