Isisbridge

Isisbridge

Posted on 06/08/2013


Photo taken on October 16, 2011



See also...

See more...

Keywords

dawn
sunrise
morning
mist
river
Isis
Thames
Port Meadow
Oxford
Oxfordshire
England
English
Britain
British
UK
landscape
October
2011
Thames Path
art
meaning
meaning of art


Authorizations, license

Visible by: Everyone
All rights reserved

165 visits

the river at dawn

the river at dawn
sunrise on the Thames at Port Meadow

Howard Somerville has particularly liked this photo


6 comments - The latest ones
Roger Bennion
Roger Bennion
Umm...........wish I could get out at the crack of dawn to get shots of this quality :-) Such a beautifully atmospheric shot.
4 years ago.
Isisbridge has replied to Roger Bennion
It doesn't happen very often.
4 years ago.
Howard Somerville
Howard Somerville
This is (without any doubt whatever) a masterpiece.
4 years ago.
Isisbridge
Isisbridge
www.facebook.com/pages/Protect-Port-Meadow-from-Oxford-Un...

The Port Meadow is an ancient grassland on the river floodplain, which has been grazed for centuries and never ploughed. It is a Scheduled National Monument and Site of Scientific Interest, and an environmental haven for the people of Oxford.

But the meadow's wide open views have now been damaged by Oxford City Council allowing Oxford University to build a row of massive blocks around the south-eastern perimeter. This has been likened to building a skyscraper next to Stonehenge, and campaigners are fighting to have the top storeys removed.

www.oxfordtimes.co.uk/news/10943788.Planning_minister_tells_Oxford_City_Council_and_Oxford_University_they_should_be_ashamed_over_Castle_Mill_flats
2 years ago.
Isisbridge
Isisbridge
DISCUSSION ON THE MEANING OF ART

Howard Somerville
A Turner. A masterpiece. I hope this piece of work is being noticed and appreciated. It's one of the finest (if not the finest) in your whole portfolio.

Isisbridge
Well thank you, Howard, but that is a matter of individual taste. I was myself more pleased with the lone runner in the dawn.

Howard Somerville
Also good, but this shot contains (apart from the mood and lighting effect) compositional elements enough for two or three good pictures. And the overall arrangement is such that if Turner had painted it, one would assume that he'd indulged in artistic licence and moved things around.

Isisbridge
Then it is the art of serendipity, for I know nothing about art or Turner, and I certainly didn't shift that boat around before I took the picture.

Howard Somerville
A Turner: upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/94/Turner,_J._M._W._-_The_Fighting_T%C3%A9m%C3%A9raire_tugged_to_her_last_Berth_to_be_broken.jpg

Isisbridge
The only resemblance I can see is the sun and the water. We don't get ships like that up the Port Meadow. But can you explain why this is reckoned to be "art"? Quite frankly, it doesn't do anything for me at all.

Howard Somerville
1. The resemblance also includes the lighting on and position of the vessels in the picture.

2. Art is anything deliberately created that via the senses, communiates directly with the emotions and the intellect, and communicates these things to others.

3. This is reckoned to be art because of the emotional impart of sunsets (particularly reflected in water) on most humans, and its symbolism. At once, the picture represents the glorious end of a day and the end of the glorious day of wind and sail, as the ghostly hulk of an herioc warship is towed to its doom by a devilish-looking steam tug, symbolic of the industrial modern age.

Isisbridge
So crumpled sheets of plastic communicate directly with the emotions and the intellect?
www.bbc.co.uk/news/mobile/entertainment-arts-15384394

Turner Prize nomination:
"Karla Black, whose large-scale sculptural installations form giant, crumpled piles of paper and sheets of plastic, with coloured powder smeared on the floor. The materials used include cellophane, sugar paper, bath bombs, vaseline and moisturising cream."

Howard Somerville
Not in any meaningful way, in my opinion. Because something is called art does not mean that it is art, that is to say, anything that Turner himself would have recognised as art.

Isisbridge
Would you agree then that a lot of so-called "art" is just a big con?

Howard Somerville
Yes. I think that a lot of modern "art" ranges from trifling conceits to outright cons. Any work (e.g. a blank canvas or a pile of bricks) that relies entirely on the beholder to perceive its beauty or meaning (in effect to read meaning into it) has no value as art. Art requires creativity, and to be art, something of substance must be created.

Isisbridge
A certain person once looked at my photostream and told me I should try to do more art, but without explaining what "art" is. So that's why I've been trying to find out.

Howard Somerville
That's a textbook case of 'begging the question'. His definition of "art" might be creating semi-abstract images which emphasise certain features - line, form, colour or movement - and making these in themselves the subject. He may consider the creative process in doing this (as opposed to replicating only what the camera saw) as art. I personally prefer literal and natural representation, and for me the art in determining and arranging what the camera sees is sufficient.

Isisbridge
That is a good answer.

Geoffrey Miller sums it up nicely in his book 'The Mating Mind'.

"Folk aesthetics concerns what ordinary people find beautiful; elite aesthetics concerns the objects of art that highly educated, rich elites learn are considered worthy of comment by their peers. With folk aesthetics, the focus is on the art-object as a display of the creator's craft. With elite aesthetics, the focus is on the viewer's response as a social display.

In response to a landscape painting, folks might say, "Well, it's a pretty good picture of a cow, but it's a lIttle smudgy", while elites might say, "How lovely to see Constable's ardent brushwork challenging the anodyne banality of the pastoral genre". The first response seems a natural expression of typical human aesthetic tastes concerning other people's artistic displays, and the second seems more of a verbal display in its own right."

I'm clearly one of the folksy types. When I visit a modern art museum, I simply don't get it.

Dave
Count me in. If I look at it and it pleases my eye then that, for me, is art enough. If I look at it and wonder what's the point, then that finishes it. In Art circles, I am convinced of the truth of "The Emperor's New Clothes."
2 years ago. Edited 2 years ago.
Isisbridge
Isisbridge
Isisbridge
If anyone bought THIS 'work of art', they might be disillusioned when they got it home.
www.flickr.com/photos/37441020@N05/8054193909
2 years ago. Edited 2 years ago.