anonrobt

Quite true - as Ayn wrote, "The basic purpose of art is not to teach, but to show - to hold up to man a concretized image of his nature and his place in the universe..." This is why, like any other work of art, Atlas Shrugged is to be not just read but read many times, each rereading providing new insights according to one's life experiences, to further the initial exemplifying given in the novel - and, as a form in enlightenment, the concretes examples given therein are needed, something mere treatises would not have - which, too, this being a deliberate philosophical novel, both the abstract and the concretes are given, correlating to each other in a unified whole of philosophical discourse... remember, all works of art deal with the important, omitting what is not - fundamentalizing as it were the essence of the universe being presented -- thus is why it is 'shorn of irrelevancies'...

I understand your sentiments... and to some degree concur - but by the same token that is used as an excuse for purveying fantasy such as Boris and similar [and yes, am guilty of this to some degree, tho less as the years go on]... there is a difference between imaginating and fantasizing - the one deals with the possibilities of the real, while the other is mere wishfulness... in olden times, when life was little for most other than to survive to reproduce, and what one did was much as what one's grands did - little wonder fantasy took hold, for reality was for most very grim and with little real enjoyment, and there was little in the way of seen improvement, so imaginating was almost unheard of... but today, there is no excuse, tho it is such an unknown idea few ever encounter to distinguish from the fantasy [consider Science fiction, for instance - how much is fantasy and silly war tales in kingdoms -KINGDOMS in the FUTURE????? - and how little is real science fiction, the hard-core stuff, like Charles Sheffield wrote] for technical wonders in art, there are some in the world, but as far as I have seen, they are indeed naturalistic - and lack in imagination, and I could show some that boggle the senses... so I have in general come to accept that if reasonably realistic yet imaginative, it is enough - as long as the idea of being imaginative is pushed, for the technical will come of its own eventually... I myself am not so fully realistic, for lack of patience, not for wishing, and knowing even that I could be so were it not at the price of forsaking a lot of ideas I'd like seeing rendered, even if not as 'real' to see as would be possible... but in the forums I present my renderings, I do push the issue of imaginating, of seeing beyond the 'just there' and strive to get those who do render so 'photoish' to expand their capabilities and 'see' with their mind's eye and put down that, with the same care and deliberation as they do in essentially copying photos or the table set-ups in front of them... but - most just say they not have that imagination, that they'd be lost if not doing as they have... and while the act of creating [which is , really, what this is all about] can be taught, I've not found a way of doing it online as Ive come to be able to in person...

and I found it online, so understand what your complaint was...

then there is this going up - not as tall, but in Dubai... http://www.dynamicarchitecture.net/home.html

Much thanks - enjoyed the video, and the website was bookmarked...

This will show in DVD come the 7th of April... you mentioned 'the story was lacking' - meaning no story? or it was lacking in something you did not mention? the blurbs make it seem worth getting [never saw it in the theaters]... [and for sure Ratatouille was a terrific movie - my fave over all the others of Pixar]

A sense of life is not a theme, except perhaps in its loosest meaning... but a theme does come from the sense of life... "A theme may be specifically philosophical or it may be a narrower generalization. It may present a certain moral-philosophical position or a purely historical view, such as the portrayal of a certain society in a certain era. There are no rules or restrictions on the choice of a theme, provided it is communicable in the form of a novel. But if a novel has no discernible theme—if its events add up to nothing—it is a bad novel; its flaw is lack of integration." Ayn Rand While she wrote this with regards to literature, it does hold true to the rest of 'fine art'... what is a 'one shot' deal in a painting can be spread over many pages of a novel - yet the principle remains... studies are, properly, means to ends - if they reside on their own, then they are incomplete, in much the same as a description narrative within a novel... themes are what express the values of the artist, and the more universal they are, the greater the work - and, conversely, the more restricted and particular, the lesser the work... A work of Art, as Rand pointed out, provides a visualization for contemplating being in one's own ideal world... since a person lives by altering his/her physical background - the given world he/she is in - to serve that person's purpose, that person must first define and then create that person's own values... but to best do so, that person need a visualization of those values - the experience of sensing being in a universe in which those values have been successfully achieved...Art, in effect, is a 'metaphysical mirror of the person"s soul,' as Rand wrote, 'an expression of the sense of life'... properly, she then went on to state, 'what should be reflected is in the nature of a salute'... How, then, does one go about this visualization? Rand said that the closer an artist comes to a CONCEPTUAL method of functioning, visually, the greater the work... this is because it is thru concepts that a person functions in the world - and it is thru the visualization of concepts that a person transmits intelligibility... Thus theming, to be effective, means being conscious of the act, of knowing what it is which is to be the theme, and setting the props, as it were, on the stage of the universe within the four sides of the canvas... if one does not know what one is theming, then the work is an act of blindness in construction, however well the technical aspects may be in the rendering... which is why so many even realistic artists play with forms and shapes and colors without much regard for the props from which these forms and shaped came, and while ending with a realistic rendering, it is one with more in the way of a 'range of the moment' in what it is they have painted... As I mentioned, most seem to be classical poses - poses used for studying the figure... dressing them in finery does not change the essence - it is still a study, with very undefined or superficial theming of a sense of life but not consciously articulated... On the plus side, these are pleasant works with pleasing figures and well rendered material and texture... and if one were of you in a portrait, then could see a desiring to have it on your wall, an expression of your 'inner self', worth looking at day after day after day... but otherwise, unless as studies of techniques, they would end being boring works to see all the time...

However, it is not enough to have the ability of rendering so realistic images - it is of equal if not more so the importance of what is done with the ability... most of these seem to be versions of classical poses set to more contemporary times, and more as studies than anything regarding specific theming, let alone regarding universal theming...

Yes - because it is a dramatized concreteness of the abstracts of the philosophy... indeed, that is one of the reasons for its surge in present popularity, the similarity in the concretes of the book to the concretes of the real world... moreover, in reading it from beginning to end, the philosophical detection of ideas - why's and what's - is given in a deliberate order, to lead the reader in effect, to grasping cause-effect relationships more readily and with greater understanding than if reading a treatise... that way, when the speech is given by Galt, everything comes into place, and all the clues of opposing philosophical views are shown why false, and the necessary answer given - then there is grasped the essentials of the philosophy in working order...

Considering how off Blink was [a good rebuttal is LeGault's Think], am not so inclined to think his latest is of much value...

Ron Merrill discusses the perceived relationship between Nietzsche and Rand in his book, The Ideas of Ayn Rand...

Where did you get this idea? not from Rand... there is, per example, an aesthetics to life as well as utilitarian, so there is indeed nothing wrong with relishing that burger, even as you renourish yourself with it - else you might as well engage in Soylents... and perhaps the enjoying is not happiness to you, the same with a toke now and then, who are you to define it as not happiness to another - there are short range happiness as well as long range, and they need not be in conflict... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c-ajrwka2RE...feature=related

And that is exactly what I am doing, while still can [because it is only going to get worse as time goes on]...

Then there's Eric Frank Russell, L. Neil smith, the LaNague League series of F. Paul Wilson, Alfred Bester and H. Beam Piper... along with Heinlein of course, and James Hogan, and Robert Forward...

It is a psychological matter - the issue of self-esteem.. if you do not see yourself as worthy of living according to your nature as a human being, then you would as such embark on a suicidal course, that is a course of action not in your best interest as a human... if, on the other hand, you accept that you are worthy, as a human, to live as one, then it is the good in that you further that goal - the moral is the rational, and the rational is the fundamental means of your survival as a human... If you see yourself as evil, that is, not worthy of being human, then you are seeing yourself as inimical to being a proper part of the environment, and destruction is inevitably the consequence because you are setting yourself against your nature, creating within yourself a conflict which would only increase over time... a viable organism, by its nature as a living being, must be an integrated being else it could not survive, and an internal conflict is a lack of integration...

Actually, the definition is wrong - that is, incomplete... what is omitted, and included in any definition I ever heard on this is the beginning phrase - "On a plane,..." The fundamental goal is your own happiness, which can be achieved thru many directions or goals [or careers, if you will], and these may well show themselves according to the changing circumstances of your life in the context of your age, growth of knowledge, experiences, and the environment you are in...

A bonsai is a craft - it has aesthetics, like all good craft, but no, it is not 'fine art'... since the Greek origin of 'art' means 'skill of mind in making' [see Bowra, The Greek Experience], it could be considered art in the same sense as cooking...

You can find my art here - Visit My Website an example - Full life

I am another Objectivist artist..... you can view my works at www.visioneerwindows.blogspot.com