Misc.

[David Morris]

Actually P was making fun of mindless art, but he featured a soulless
artist churning out endless bagel (I think) paintings.

Cartoons have always been in literature, usually called comedy, satire,
parody...

On Sunday, November 4, 2012, Markekohut wrote:

> I thought P made fun of abstract expressionism in V. , no? And in AtD
> maybe?
>
> My question still exists, I think, independent of one's final take on Pop
> Art, but maybe I am wrong
> And they are progressively knotted.
>
> My question is: the Zeitgeist accepted, created, room for cartoon
> representation in Art, however
> Wrong or degraded that might be. Felt that the human representation from
> Vermeer, Whistler thru
> Winslow Homer ( (and fill in the blank) had, maybe, said all it could and
> now was saying we are no longer as human?
>
> so, since TRP is an artist of his time and 'for all time' we think, have
> cultural/literary commentators written of TRP in that Zeitgeist
> perspective? Anyone, anyone?
>
> (I will respectfully disagree on PopArt as a generality. I have always
> been hit and moved with
> some Rauschenberg ( and others). I have said to Many Anti-folks, " but
> many of our emotions are now cartoonish")
>
> Much art is Art because of the full embodiment of certain ideas, IMHO.
> Gombrich's work on THAT  within the history of Art convinced me, at least.
>
> Warhol was a massive genius, IMHO. see Danto, others, on. He is
> Pynchonesque in his embodiment of his Time, in his originality, in his
> sensibility. but I'm nobody, who are you?
>
> Sent from my iPad
>
> On Nov 4, 2012, at 11:17 AM, Keith Davis <kbob42 at gmail.com<javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'kbob42 at gmail.com');>>
> wrote:
>
> Agreed. Warhol? Give me a break.
> On Nov 4, 2012 11:04 AM, "David Morris" <fqmorris at gmail.com<javascript:_e({}, 'cvml', 'fqmorris at gmail.com');>>
> wrote:
>
>> BTW, I think Pop Art, undeniably still very much influential, has led to
>> a degradation of art.  It celebrates crass, and is based in cynicism. It is
>> also essentially meta-art: the value of the object is conceptual, not the
>> object's own qualities.
>>
>> I know I sound a retro conservative, but I think I'm looking forward to
>> something better than what now is.
>>
>> ---------- Forwarded message ----------in
>> From: *David Morris*
>>
>> P makes fun of Pop Art in V.  Pop Art may be a precursor of Post
>> Modernism, but their aesthetics are very dissimilar.
>> Also, Rauschenberg is not generally thought a Pop figure. He's more a
>> modernist collage master.
>>
>> On Sunday, November 4, 2012, Markekohut wrote:
>>
>>> I caught up with a recent Friday NYT, reading luxuriously all the new
>>> movie reviews, all the long art show pieces, etc.
>>>
>>> Lotsa good words on the Rauschenberg exhibit and other pop art from the
>>> time.Rauschenberg
>>> Drawing cartoon panels as his breakthrough around 1962ff. Warhol, others.
>>>
>>> And I asked myself to ask the plisters why P appearing around then,
>>> faulted by many for his cartoon characters isn't ' talked about much as
>>> part of the same Zeitgeist.
>>>
>>> Those artists gave us ourselves back as cartoons---and we think they
>>> were right
>>>
>>
>>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://waste.org/pipermail/pynchon-l/attachments/20121104/d092c055/attachment.html>