Jump to content
Objectivism Online Forum

Alfa

Regulars
  • Content Count

    676
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    3

Alfa last won the day on June 25 2016

Alfa had the most liked content!

1 Follower

About Alfa

  • Rank
    Advanced Member
  • Birthday 10/19/1982

Previous Fields

  • Country
    Sweden
  • State (US/Canadian)
    Not Specified
  • Relationship status
    No Answer
  • Sexual orientation
    Straight
  • Copyright
    Copyrighted

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

12772 profile views
  1. Why, thank you! I also very much appreciate the civil tone. It's much more fun to discuss things in an open and civil way. I wont be checking in here fot a little while, so I wish you all a happy new year! w
  2. "Visual clarity" can be a bit ambigous. Ayn Rand for example didn't like visible paint strokes, but is smooth blending really clearer or just smoother? Is Leonardo's sfumato technique clearer than Sargent's? (Sargent painted with thick, opaque, brush strokes, making sure to really nail the color and value with every stroke. A technique that demands incredible skill and focus.)
  3. The answer that is missing here is why painting could not reach man's emotions directly, like music. Saying that painting is conceptual because of the relationship between recognisable conretes is not really an answer to that. Could you explain the conceptual relationshop within a piece of music? I could say that I find this: to invoke the feeling of Walking along a quay on a bright sunny day, set against a blue sky and ships sailing in the water, while it's busy with people and things moving about. I could of course point to such things as the warm yellow color, the blue triangle a
  4. You're sneaking in "communacte anything broad". Do you think strong verticals in a composition communicate the same feeling as a horizontal composition? Can you tell the difference in feeling from looking at a piece of brushed metal and a piece of plastic? Do you Think it's all the same to lead the eye through a painting wiht long sweeping arcs or through short abrubpt turns? Is a cool blue all the same as a warm orange? I certainly think they communicate quite different things. Painting is not music is not an argument. Associations drawn from general feelings is not the sa
  5. That is quite true, greater economic freedom meant more opportunities to experiment and be avante garde. The patrons went from the rich to the middle class, and the art changed accordingly.
  6. It's rather well established that modern art began in the Paris art scene in the mid 19th century, breaking with the heavily tradition laden classical academic art. Edouard Manet, for instance, quite successfully critized the academic art and caused outrage among critics with paintings like "Olypmia" and "Luncheon on the Grass". And if you think they were nihilists out to destroy art you'll have to consider many impressionist works shortly after Paris was besieged by the Prussians in 1870, and socialist Communards tried overthrowing the government which ended in the Bloody Week. Yet,
  7. The most commonly debated art topic on here, I think... Can shapes, colors, textures, arrangements etc. communicate something without representing any concretes? For example, can shape be beautiful, ugly, elegant, jarring, etc? What concretes does Scriabin's Etude #12 Op. 8 represent?
  8. I think one big problem is that many Objectivists are not artists, but they like to be art critics. Not that you really need to be one to be the other, but it's not uncommon for things to get a bit vicious when things don't fit the Objectivist(tm) criteria of good art. Sadly, because I think there are so much more to say about art than Ayn Rand did or the interpretations of what she said. Anyhow, I'm not so active here anymore but if you want to talk art. Like, really getting down and dirty with it, well... I'm game. Just throw a ball and I'll play it right back at you. I'm actually starv
  9. By the way, that might be somewhat of a local thing. I understand that americans are a lot more comfortable with disagreement that us swedes, or europeans, are. Here you better fit into the politically correct mold, or you're going to make enemies (and I have...). My friends are the kind of people who can handle disagreement, intense arguments, and even get pissed off without making a big deal of it. Rather, they enjoy different views and like to argue them. That's pretty rare over here. Most people would just get pissed off, scream obscenities and never talk to you again.
  10. Sorry to say, but they were not as close as you thought. Don't get me wrong. I have a few friends who are fairly negative to Objectivism (not that they understand the philosophy, but anyhow). However, we have enough in common have fun together and discuss philosophy or politics without anyone getting too pissed off. Most importantly, there's a mutual respect. It would be impossible if there wasn't (it would probably have ended in fisticuffs otherwise). I mean, we can all think that the other one has some stupid idea - and say it just like that - but there's at least this mutual respe
  11. Aren't those necessary in any close relationship? I mean, sure, in a professional environment I might have to deal with some of that cordially. Bullies though, might find I'm not so nice after all. Either way, people like that I always keep at a good distance. Having someone like that as a partner would be unthinkable. Mutual respect and admiration is a necessity for a romantic relationship. Who the hell would want to be in a relationship where those are not cornerstones? Personally, I think there are lot's of people worth respect, admiration and even love who are not Objectivists. I
  12. Objectivism doesn't say anything about Bob Ross. Strange question... if you enjoy Bob Ross, then what's the problem? I personally enjoy his videos. He's like a happy bumblebee and seems to love what he's doing. I also think his approach is good for beginners. As for his paintings I find them to be full of empty calories and reminding me of religious kitsch.
  13. I don't know. Unless you've done some real studies and you're and expert on the subject, you don't know either. I think it's easy to see that women and men are different. Different hormones, different brain structures etc. That's fine. I don't think it's even that controversial. But, to answer what exact role biology plays is a field reserved only for the real experts. You and I may have theories based on some research, but to keep it honest and true... we don't really know shit. It's too complicated for laymen. That seems very much in line with the theory of evolution, doesn
  14. I don't really give a rats ass what the Objectivist answer is, but yes... if you don't like the results you've been getting you need to make some improvements. A friend of mine used to have the saying "be that guy...". Meaning basically that if you want to be someone who attracts people around you, then "be that guy...". Be that guy who takes initiative for parties or other events (depending on what you want, of course). Be that guy who has a lot going on in his life. Be that guy who's so excited by his own life that others want to partake. I think you get the idea. Of course, i
×
×
  • Create New...