On Sep 4, 2006, at 3:46 PM, Elizabeth Heisey wrote:
> To explain why I asked the question about imaginative
> artists...and hopefully this is will explain the
> context a couple asked for...
> Recently there was a question in the group about what
> artists do and lots of verbs came back. Like that
> artists preserve memories, synthesize, create or
> imagine. So... each week I have been talking about
> examples of artists who do these things. It has been a
> good although open ended discussion. Next week is
> imagine. So...Does this explanation function as a
> context? I hope someone will challenge me to think
> rightly about this if there is such a thing...
> I guess for me personally I started wondering if
> imagination wasn't my own personal definition for art
> because I could hardly think of an artist that didn't
> use imagination--often in such interesting ways. But I
> had seen it on the list...
There are certain artists who can stretch an idea much more than
I believe that falls into the area of flexibility in the four
criteria I mentioned earlier.
I mentioned two living artists who I feel are very creative:
Judy Chicago and Juame Plensa.
Fluency: Means coming up with a large number of ideas.
Flexibility: Means coming up with varied concepts.
Elaboration: Means putting lots of information into your work.
Originality: Means to be new and unique in your thinking.
I'll list a third, R M Fisher (an environmental sculptor) from New York.
Here is an example of his work in Kansas City. His sculptures sit
atop pylons which support cables to hold up a building which is build
over a freeway.
I believe this is an artist that uses his creativity much more than
Except for Judy Chicago, I doubt the other two are very familiar to most
art teachers. These artists seem to be able to challenge the norm.
Isn't that what true creativity is. I may paint pretty pictures but I am
a long way from being really creative.
Woody, Retired in Albuquerque