George Aar

The Burgess Meredith/Lon Chaney version is the only one I've seen. I just can't get myself to watch many remakes, as they miss the mark so badly, so often. Or, maybe it's just that you get used to thinking of so-and-so as a certain character and anyone else just doesn't do it for you. Like Fletcher Christian, I still can't see Marlon Brando in that role, gotta be Clark Gable. And Captain Bligh? Nobody could ever hold a candle to Charles Laughton's...

Lindy, Yeah, I'm pretty familiar with all the major names (and most of the lessers) of "Ukiyo-e". Hokusai was the "Old man, mad about painting". He lived in something like 80 different places in his lifetime. Went through wives and lovers as aften as he did socks (tabi?). Considered all his contemporaries as unworthy of holding a brush, and said of himself that one day he hoped to be able to paint properly. His output was voluminous. But he cared nothing for money. Lived in wretched poverty and embarassing excess. A real character, but is now the most famous of any Japanese artist of any medium. Hokusai's "real" works are mostly too spendy for a mere human to collect, but I do have a repro. of "The Great Wave" and "The Fisherman" (both from the "36 Views of Mt. Fuji" series). I do have a couple of original prints of his, one from "100 poems as told by the Nurse" series and some from unknown series, but they all have condition problems (the only reason I could afford them). http://www.andreas.com/pixs/hok-1b.jpg Yeah, the impressionists really took to Japanese prints in a big way. They seemed to like the flat perspective, and lack of a focal point. Van Gogh and Monet both had large collections, I'm told. Monet's house still has several of his JWPs hanging on the wall, (completely faded to B&W, from accounts. Japanese Woodblock prints are not well-suited to be displayed for long periods of time in the light!) I've sorta grown tired of Ukiyo-e prints lately, though. And find I like Shin-hanga (the "New Print" movement) and even "Sosaku Hanga" ("creative print" ) designs much better.

O.K., I guess I've said enough about what I DON'T like. Take a look at something I DO: http://www.hanga.com/viewimage.cfm?ID=3393 This artist, Ota Masamitsu, did a series of 12 Kabuki prints in 1949 and then another 12 in 1955. I'm slowly collecting all 24, but this one is the one I looking for the hardest. I think it's the best of the lot. I found it at a gallery in Honolulu, but I wasn't willing to part with the $1800. she wanted for it. One will come along with a more reasonable price tag, I'm sure. I'm more impressed by the technique than I am of the actual image. The carving of the keyblock is simply a tour-de-force. Can you imagine carving all those strands of hair into a block of cherry? Anyway, so I'm more taken with the complexity of the details of execution than I am with the finished product. That and the printing (and the quality of the paper) is all first-rate with this series of prints. Even woodblock neophytes are blown away when they see one of these in person. They're incredible little gems of design and the skill of the carver and printer...

HA! I never gave that much thought (even though I saw that particular routine TWICE). In retrospect I can see how so much of what we thought was spontaneous ad-libs by "Joyful Noise" or the "Take a Stand Caravan" or whatever event-du-jour we were currently disrupting our lives to attend was simply well-choreographed performance art (or - sometimes - not that well choreographed). Yeah, all that "in-spirit-action" going on, huh? pfffffft... We were such chumps...

Mstar, Yeah, I saw a T.V. news magazine piece on that gal. I don't know if it's in your linked story or not (I haven't read it yet), but the hotsh1t art critics and collectors all dismissed her painting as crap. "It couldn't possibly be a Pollock, it doesn't have the power, the energy, or his fluidity, yadda, yadda" and such blather. Then they tested the paints from her painting and found they matched the paints still on display in Pollock's studio, and also found his fingerprint on the back of the painting (of the same paint)!, but the "experts" still couldn't believe it. No, mere forensic evidence couldn't convince them! Sorry if I'm just reiterating what's in the link. I'll read it now, I promise...

Why do the best ones always seem to have such a self-destructive streak? Bill Evans, Art Tatum, Billie Holiday, Joe Pass, Jimi Hendrix, and the list goes on. They all had DECADES more music in 'em.

The jobs I had were fine. It was being a W.O.W that was the embarassment...

Uh, lessee, That would be Ronald Reagan as George Gipp, Pat O'Brien as Knute Rockne in that Midwest Favorite "Knute Rockne - All American" And one of the most famous lines in filmdom "Go out and win one for the Gipper!"

Well, He's been behaving much better since the anger-management seminar...

Then there's the ever present question, What makes an artist? I've always been fascinated by this guy in particular: http://instruct1.cit.cornell.edu/courses/n...%20Page%202.htm I've always wondered if maybe "genius" isn't just another form of insanity, i.e. - your brain isn't functioning in a manner that's healthy for the rest of your body (or those around you). But I must confess that I find his later work to be kinda neat. I also can't help but laugh when I see his progression from mildly amusing cartoonist to spaced-out acidhead - I guess there's enough distance between him and me that I can afford to find humor at his expense. I also wonder if numerous other artists of note had similar mental afflictions. Certainly Van Gogh comes to mind, among others...

Makes you feel nervous? Hmmm. Myself, I can't see enough on the canvas to feel one way or the other. The only feeling I get is - again - that nagging sense that somebody is Bull$#1tting me. I've seen more evocative patterns on the FLOOR of a paintbooth...

I think I dated her in High School, Bumpy. Of course, she had zits then. (and she always wanted to go out for pizza, IIRC)

I really admire the ability of an artist like this: http://www.sai.msu.su/wm/paint/auth/vermee...er.milkmaid.jpg Can't you feel the warmth of the sunshine on her shoulder? It amazes me how the appearance of light can be so effectively portrayed with just oil on canvas. Could I live with this? Hell yeah. Send a couple over. I've got the wallspace. I can't say much of anything good about this sort of "stuff": http://www.nga.gov/feature/pollock/lm1024.jpg I saw several of his works at the MOMA in NYC a few years ago. I left with the distinct impression that someone had been blowing smoke up my azz. Just how is it that drizzling paint on a canvas is art? I'm sorry, when it takes a self-important, snobbish, condescending dweeb with a Doctorate in Art History a half an hour to explain to the unwashed heathen (like me) why a given work of art is "Important" or "Vitally important" to the collective Ouevre of "art", I'm afraid something is missing. That something is some indication of talent or ability on the part of the artist. I don't get it at all. Pollock, Jasper Johns, even Andy Warhol did little that impressed me much. But, whuddu I know? I'm not an art Historian.

I had forgotten all about Laura Nyro till just the other day I was talking about her in "chat". I wondered what became of her, and, sad to say, it wasn't good. She died years ago at age 49 from cancer. But what an incredible talent she had. Even more incredible, is that almost nobody remembers her, though they've all heard of her songs, when prompted. http://youtube.com/watch?v=CUa8mbgKex8 and another more familiar one: http://youtube.com/watch?v=dnimlI7ZIq8&feature=related

Or in Spidermans' name either...

And how about that Ouija board game? Boy, that was a devilish game that dated back Centuries! Uh, actually it was invented in the late Victorian age as a mildly amusing Parlor game. And no, it's not tapping into demonic powers. It simply uses the (pretty well understood) ideomotor effect. Yeah, I know, it left us all OPEN for possession though, right? O.K., fine...

Icky, creepy. Sorry, but you DID ask...

Uh, O.K., I guess that clears it up (?) :huh:

But no doubt YOU have, eh? Doesn't this paragraph strike you as just a tad on the arrogant, condescending side? I'm sorry SirG, it still seems pretty squishy whatever it is we're supposed to embrace after we've had our semester of rational thinking. If something cannot be explained in rational, concrete terms that are within the accepted parameters of how we understand the laws of physics, why should one "grow" to accept it? Moreover, how does one "grow" beyond rational thinking without embracing nonsense? Why would one WANT to believe in that which cannot be proven?

Sir G, I guess it comes as no surprise that I don't follow your line of reasoning. Is cleaving to rational thought really just a stop along the way of one's suppsed "growth"? And, if so, where does one's "growth" take them after that, to IRrational thought? I guess...

What about "The Greatest Story Ever Told"? Remember Pat Boone as the angel in Jesus" tomb? Good grief, I think he was wearing tennis shoes!

The lesson I've learned: Don't ever make friends with women. It just doesn't pay in the long run. Sooner or later they'll do it to ya, probably when you least expect it...

I dunno Radar, I don't think we know enough about what went on with the kids and in the families to draw any reasonable conclusions. As much as I dislike people letting superstition rule their lives (and the lives of those around them), the idea of the government forcibly removing children from their parents is at least equally as unsettling. I would hope that the children are being well cared for and in loving family units, despite the possible overabundance of "moms". But, without seeing and hearing what goes on in their homes, it's a tough call to make. Whacko religions (or even garden variety ones) give me the creeps more every day, but I don't know as just being a superstitious dolt is reason enough to remove kids from one's home...

Anyone else notice that WayWorld apologist du jour "Shift this" has seemed to have disappeared? One wonders if that new, kinder, gentler Way that he was describing has taken to re-educating him?