Note: To protect the privacy of our members, e-mail addresses have been removed from the archived messages. As a result, some links may be broken.
<< I assume you meant to send this e-mail (see below) to ArtsEdNet Talk, an
on-line discussion group that takes place over e-mail. Messages that
you would like to be posted to ArtsEdNet Talk should be sent to:
You're right. So now I'm posting it where I meant to. Thanks.
> I think I'll add a little to this, which also may already have been heard
> I skipped the old thread so here goes:
> Scene designers, and sign painters use clip art. There's run of the mill
> clip art and then and then there's really good clip art... a lot of the
> Pictorial Archives for instance are amazing and well worth having as two-D
> reference material for anatomy, perspective, caricature, vintage
> styles of different eras....
> Andy Warhol and his ilk must not have convinced some of us that
> commercial/media/fineart can all be on equal ground. To be honest I feel
> exhilarated when I see the graphic design that goes on these days,
> cannibalizing every imaginable source. It's a kind of high tech commercial
> folk art. So maybe it doesn't have the same standards that we promote in
> teaching children how to look and how to draw what they see, and to have
> certain expressive qualities of homemade iconography. Art seems to be the
> back door where the spiritual gets into public schools. Learning to draw
> held sacred by almost anyone who wants to know for sure if he or she can
> produce art "the hard way" ... or if one is confined to abstraction and
> assemblage of the work of others.
> These thoughts are pretty random ... but I thought I'd share them.