Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Vladamir Kush

Rate this topic


athena glaukopis

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 90
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

An ex of mine introduced me to surrealism and I loved it. Lots of it is dire, with a very negative sense of life. But even despite that, I've always thought the entire composition of the piece wasn't badly done. In fact, they're very well thought out.

In cases like these, they are not just well done, they're also clever. The surrealism serves a purpose - it isn't surreal for the sake of just making itself some strange thing, supposedly beyond human comprehension.

My favorite one, for that reason, is the one with the boats sailing across the sky. I can't quite describe it (I think I said in a previous thread about how terrible I am at explaining why I like certain visual art), but it's just so serene and... warm. It reminds me of lazy afternoons with huge expanses of possibility.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think these are all pretty cool. They don't leave you feeling gloomy and they are bright and acurrate in an imaginitive way. Looking at these is also much better than the usual mountains and seascapes.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am not a fan of surrealism, pretty colors or not. It is rooted in dadaism which is anti-rational. It is defined as: Dictation of thought in the absence of all control exercised by reason, outside of all aesthetic and moral preoccupation. Non sequitur is a logical falacy one is trying to avoid in one's thinking yet it is a major feature of surrealistic art.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you elaborate as to why? I guess I don't see it.

Sophia mostly did. Surrealism is very Freudian, in that artists believe in the supremacy of an unconscious mind. The artist is giving priority to his imagination over his senses, placing beauty in a Platonistic abstract "other-world." He is taking the significance out of ordinary objects and giving priority to his psyche, for no reason other than to create something which can be seen as "pretty." Why can it be seen as pretty? Because you have never seen it before within such a context, organized in such a creative way, that's why. It is meant to create a feeling within the beholder by appealing to his emotions.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm a bit reluctant to label any person as philosophically bankrupt just on the basis of their artwork unless it is a completely disintegrated nihilistic blob painter.

Unless we want to call Frank O'Connor philosophically bankrupt...

DimReturns.jpg

Don't we thinkg that what has been said about surrealism here could just as easily be said about impressionism and disintegration but I see impressionistic overtones in some works that posters choose to bring. I think Athena qualified her original characterization. Yes, he's a surrealist, but I do think his sense of life is wonderful. I especially like the last with man as the core of a flame.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is true that Kush art displays a benevolent view. However, I find surrealism uncomprehensible. To me this positive feeling re: Kush is like looking at a smile of a crazy person. (Know what I mean?) Happiness disconnected from reason. I do like his technique but I have a hard time identifying the message of his visual methaphors. To me it just does not add up. Maybe someone can go through that analysis and show me how it all makes sense. Most of surrealism however is not meant to make sense.

DimReturns.jpg

I don't get that painting either. I don't care who painted it. Maybe someone can explain it's message to me.

Edited by ~Sophia~
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This one is not bad:

morningblossumns7.jpg

Two people, obviously romantically involved. Romantic relationship here is likened to a beautiful flower: special, possibly fruit (or seed) (more value) producing given right conditions. But also fragile, like a life form, needing nourishment/taking care of in order to survive. Its existance, like this flower - elevates the surroundings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why can't art simply be a playful juxtaposition of elements? In The Act of Creation, the great psychological theorist Arthur Koestler discussed the "bisociation of matrices" or the joining of of patterns of thought which had previously been unconnected. Koestler would recognize and, I think, applaud the fertile imagination at work here.

"Philosophically bankrupt"? "Anti-rational"? It's anything but.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I only wish to analyze the artist, not a particular painting:

I think that it's clear, if you click through his galleries, that Kush does not possess a consistent philosophy. I am certain that his sense of life contains the Benevolent Universe Premise, but it is obvious that he has not ever translated those emotions into thoughts.

Clearly, he does not see a need to emphasize the distinction between human actions and natural phenomenon; why would he see a need to distinguish between good human action and bad human action?

The question for Objectivists then becomes: what makes you capable of enjoying these paintings? Does the juxtaposition of ships in the sky mean that man has been liberated from the "constraints" of reality and definition or does it suggest man's immense, unmatchable power? I suspect that this is the hazard of surrealism, as such.

Technical skill and style (of which I think Kush is replete with) aside, what, philosophically, makes man burning inside a candle a celebration of human power rather than an expostion of human suffering? My answer is: Objectivism.

Which means: Strictly (and sadly speaking - because I really do love some of them), Kush is a weak artist; even in his most inspiring prints. Especially in his most inspiring prints; the philosophically sophisticated viewer (me) cannot help but wonder if he is sweet, bitter, or bitter-sweet on man's position in the universe. Does he mean that man's glories are only possible in another dimension? Does he mean that they're impossible? Does he mean that they're possible, but only at the expense of one's sanity? That kind of uncertainty is not satisfying for me.

I suppose that if he were to destroy, say, 75% of his work I would he shouting his name from the rooftops, but given his panoply, I have to be suspicious. Has anyone ever taken a look at Nick Gaetano's other work - besides his Ayn Rand cover art?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why can't art simply be a playful juxtaposition of elements?

If it does not make sense what would be the purpose of such playfullness (in epistemological context)?

What is the value of imagination disconnected from reason?

Edited by ~Sophia~
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If it does not make sense what would be the purpose of such playfulness (in epistemological context)?

What is the value of imagination disconnected from reason?

I see imagination as a springboard to the possible, even when separated from reality. How many scientists engineers and explorers have been inspired by the works of men like HG Wells?

Who is to say that these fanciful creations would not lead to a serendipitous or intutitive leap?

Edited by Zip
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just as arbitrary an assumption as the one that says they wont? ;)

I have not made any assertions. I have simply identified your statement as without cognitive status.

It is not my responsibility to refute someone's arbitrary assertions. The burden of proof for your positive claim is on you.

Edited by ~Sophia~
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have not made any assertions. I have simply identified your statement as without cognitive status.

It is not my responsibility to refute someone's arbitrary assertions. The burden of proof for your positive claim is on you.

No, you asked

What is the value of imagination disconnected from reason?
and I replied with a possible and plausable answer.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...