HOME | DD

MOURNING-SKY In reply to ??? [2009-04-13 23:14:53 +0000 UTC]

Wow, just wow

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

fergil In reply to ??? [2009-04-13 22:56:30 +0000 UTC]

I love the ancient look of it... I mean, it's beautifully painted, but it also looks like a classic piece. Very hard to do!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

PeacefulSoul In reply to SamBlob [2009-04-13 23:13:56 +0000 UTC]

In other words, to Hell with literature and GO artwork? Where do you come up with such a humiliating line? I am sorry if I am being vague about anything in your comment, but there seems to be some suggarcoating in there. Literature is just as good IF it is written well. A good writer doesn't have to try and persuade, it just comes naturally.

👍: 0 ⏩: 3

SamBlob In reply to PeacefulSoul [2009-04-14 00:52:23 +0000 UTC]

Have I mentioned literature?

It'd be a raw deal even if the master in question were Vonnegut or Goethe.

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

PeacefulSoul In reply to SamBlob [2009-04-14 01:51:01 +0000 UTC]

I forgot to write in the following line:

. . . as Artwork is worth describing (mentioned in the second quote) when you described it as being this work.

and a typo I made:

Again, I apologize for any misunderstanding between us.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

PeacefulSoul In reply to SamBlob [2009-04-14 01:44:03 +0000 UTC]

Quote 1:

"You got a raw deal. Expect lots of frustration in life trying to explain things..."
-Samblob-

Quote 2:

"On the other hand, the ability to do work like this just might be worth it."
-SamBlob-

The first quote, to me, reads as if anything that is descriptive to describe things is not worth describing, as Artwork is worth describing; and for the Artist to only focus JUST on that. That is what I got from it. I also said I am sorry if I was vague about anything I said.

However, you on the other hand blatantly said, “You have no soul” in one of your other vulgar comments and mentioned NOTHING about an apology IF you were wrong. Instead, you kept it firm as though you knew what you were talking whereas I did not. Sadly, you did know what you were talking about just as I did not understand what you wrote. I said I was sorry if I was vague and [I am] sorry that I was vague about your comment.

Again, I apologize for any misunderstand between us.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SamBlob In reply to PeacefulSoul [2009-04-14 02:26:10 +0000 UTC]

Have you ever tried to train anyone in any form of technique? It is bloody hard work, often to no avail as the person being trained just doesn't get it.

Multiply that kind of frustration by *anyone*, in *any* technique one knows, and that leads to both physical and mental exhaustion.

There are some who might consider such a curse to be a fair price for instruction leading to the skill displayed by the artwork. I am not one of them.

I did not say you have no soul. I said your soul is not at peace. That is my observation. All your comments to me are here, any one of which bears out this observation. With so much evidence presented, I have no more apology to make to you than Galileo would have to the Vatican for making observations that contradicted Church dogma.

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

PeacefulSoul In reply to SamBlob [2009-04-14 02:46:24 +0000 UTC]

And might I add that the difference between your 'being vague' and mine, is that I vaguely went against your comment you made; you are going against my whole being.

What do you call that? Exactly. Even after I said I was sorry. That's quite low don't you think?

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

PeacefulSoul In reply to SamBlob [2009-04-14 02:41:55 +0000 UTC]

Well you too, are vague. I said I was sorry and you still continue to be just that. It seems the other way around.


Have a nice day.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SamBlob In reply to PeacefulSoul [2009-04-14 02:55:27 +0000 UTC]

I shall look through my comments again, as I recall most of them to be quite specific.

I shall try so to do, although it is night as I type this.

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

PeacefulSoul In reply to SamBlob [2009-04-14 03:16:05 +0000 UTC]

I agree (I forgot to say) what you said was specific and I eventually caught on to what you meant. Then said numerous times I was sorry, afterward, for my misunderstanding you. However, the vagueness now that I speak against you, is the persistancy in saying my soul is not at peace, or whatever else that can be thrown into that phrase.

That to me is a lot more harsh than my misunderstanding your comment.

Anyways, what's sais is done can cannot be changed and I forgive, alright? This shouldn't have happened and [I am] sorry!


Take care.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

PeacefulSoul In reply to PeacefulSoul [2009-04-14 03:16:54 +0000 UTC]

said* (correction).

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

PeacefulSoul In reply to SamBlob [2009-04-14 02:58:30 +0000 UTC]

So be it, this shall continue some other day. It too, is night over here and I'm to sleep.

I do not want to leave on bad terms. I said I was sorry quite a few times.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

DianaACastle In reply to PeacefulSoul [2009-04-14 00:41:35 +0000 UTC]

Umm, sorry to intervene, I could be completely wrong- but- I really don't think the person you replied to- or attacked, as it looks from my perspective- was trying to insinuate anything about literature being less than art. I think they were, quite plainly, stating that, TEACHING others(in other words, explaining, showing, comparing)in itself, would be a hard road. I'm not sure where you got that they were making a reference to literature itself.

Much the same as what a lot of teachers say when they're asked why they decided to be teachers " Sometimes it can be really frustrating working with some kids but in the end it's worth it when you know you really made a difference for one or two". Parallel to that quote I think SamBlob was saying that "sometimes teaching others might be hard, but having the knowledge to use in the first place will be worth it".

Again, sorry if I'm babbling away, but I think a lot of things over the internet get misinterpreted, and instead of just asking this person what, exatcly, they meant by that you sort of just jumped to a conclusion and attacked- which is the only reason I'm even writing this.

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

SamBlob In reply to DianaACastle [2009-04-14 02:28:21 +0000 UTC]

Thank you for seeing most of what I was trying to say and for explaining it. I hope it works.

One thing though: I think the requirement that the student teach *any* other artist *anything* sounds like a potentially monstrous curse. Not only does the task have the potential to be physically overwhelming (there are literally millions of artists out there...) but there is also the potential of toxic personality clashes between a student and a teacher under such an obligation.

To illustrate: Were I under such an obligation, and were to ask me for instruction on a topic on which I could instruct him, I would *have* to instruct him on it, instead of doing that which I would be naturally inclined to do, which would be to leave him to seek instruction elsewhere.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

PeacefulSoul In reply to SamBlob [2009-04-14 02:50:44 +0000 UTC]

Get over it, I understand where you stand now in your comment. Just because I misunderstood it the first time, does not mean you have to get all over me like flies on shit. Now is when my username is contradictory because you ticked me off. I hope you are proud of yourself!

Hell, I would be too if I took as much pride in your 'continuing to misunderstand' where 'I' stand!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

PeacefulSoul In reply to DianaACastle [2009-04-14 01:53:45 +0000 UTC]

I'll be honest and say I did not read everything you wrote, but I knew where it was leading to. To make a long story short, I would much rather hear/read it from the horses mouth (an old expression) than from someone that has nothing to do with the conversation whatsoever.

If I made a misinterpretation, he or she will tell me. Not anyone else.

Take care!

👍: 0 ⏩: 2

DianaACastle In reply to PeacefulSoul [2009-04-14 18:50:27 +0000 UTC]

Though it's kind of rude that you didnt even completely hear me out before replying, though I read everything you said before doing so, at least you admitted so truthfully. Hope everything's resolved by now.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

PeacefulSoul In reply to DianaACastle [2009-04-14 22:05:55 +0000 UTC]

It seems everything is resolved. I am sorry if I have been rudebut that is just the way I am and won't change for anyone. I really do not know why you would read everything I wrote, nor do I know why it strikes peoples interest to even bother reading what was really a bunch of crap between two people. Because in all reality, it was crap.

All over ONE misunderstanding. That was just one . . . could you imagine the billions of others? It's not wonder the World never gets along. Usually the correct way to approach someone is to say, "No, that is not what I meant by that, what I meant was . . ." and correct the person.

It should have never broke out into an argument and could have been handled better by the person I misunderstood.



Anyway, have a nice day!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

SamBlob In reply to PeacefulSoul [2009-04-14 02:48:33 +0000 UTC]

Now this statement explains much. I wonder, could the lack of thoroughness you *honestly* displayed in writing this reply be the cause of the lack of insight you have displayed throughout the entire thread?

I believe this adage is common to both our cultures: "It is better for one to say nothing and have people believe one to be a fool than to open one's mouth and remove all doubts."

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

PeacefulSoul In reply to SamBlob [2009-04-14 02:53:05 +0000 UTC]

I said what I meant, and meant what I said. If whom I am having a converse with wants to explain something, it will be from him or her, NOT someone else. Now, do you understand this reply or do you not?

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SamBlob In reply to PeacefulSoul [2009-04-14 02:58:15 +0000 UTC]

Yes, I understand quite clearly. Instead of examining another point of view to see if you could learn anything from it, you basically brush brush it off and give a very-lightly veiled "Keep your nose out of my business" reply.

You seem to be defining yourself very clearly on this thread.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

PeacefulSoul In reply to SamBlob [2009-04-14 02:59:38 +0000 UTC]

Exactly, because I wanted to hear exactly what it meant you said from you NOT some other person that 'could be' wrong.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

PeacefulSoul In reply to PeacefulSoul [2009-04-13 23:26:56 +0000 UTC]

If I may add, Artwork can have the same failure if not more in explaining things as literature does. Therefore, both are worth doing -- not one over the other. (Yes I know I replied to myself to make an attachment on my previous message).

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

SamBlob In reply to PeacefulSoul [2009-04-14 01:02:28 +0000 UTC]

The irony of your insinuation that I have made any value statement judging between visual and written art lies in your username. Anyone who reads what I've said and is uptight enough to read a condemnation of literature into it obviously has a soul which is not at peace.

👍: 0 ⏩: 1

PeacefulSoul In reply to SamBlob [2009-04-14 02:01:02 +0000 UTC]

Depdending what culture you are, I guess we both have our different ways of saying things. I am sorry you think I have no soul, or a soul that is not at peace JUST because of a mere misunderstanding.

👍: 0 ⏩: 0

C4M30 In reply to ??? [2009-04-13 20:05:05 +0000 UTC]

This is absolutely gorgeous! The way you flawlessly painted the blues, yellows, reds, and greens in the least expected places on her skin make this painting come alive. Truly worthy of a DD. Fantastic job!

👍: 0 ⏩: 0