A Conversation for Eustace

Now that one I understand

Post 1

~ jwf ~ scribblo ergo sum

Amazing use of language and imagery.
As a genuine bona fide 'war baby' I found myself choking up.
smiley - cheers
On a more constructive note, I worry that on some people's computers your hand written text might prove too small and illegible. It would be a shame if some people were denied access to your mind thru no fault of their own myopia. My own eyeballs grow more elliptical every day.
smiley - bigeyes
Keep up the great work; if that's not too much to ask. I know it bothered van Gogh and Picasso.
smiley - magic
~jwf~


Now that one I understand

Post 2

Wowbagger

Whimsy turns in on itself and bites its own bottom, drawing blood.
Carry on sir.
smiley - smiley


Now that one I understand

Post 3

Munchkin

I love the picture at the top. Before I had read the test I thought it was leaping out of the screen at me to bop me on the nose, so my brain must be wired up correctly somewhere along the line, which is nice. smiley - smiley


Now that one I understand

Post 4

DoctorMO (Keeper of the Computer, Guru, Community Artist)

hehe, same here...

*must remember brain next time*

-- DoctorMO --


Now that one I understand

Post 5

spimcoot

Technical note: to make the text clearer there would have to be less of it. I can handle the discipline of that but like the format as it is. Anyone suffering legibility problems probably reads something far better, as pure art lies in the expectation of what one is about to receive rather than its actuality (transubstantiation?).

Ta ever so for the nice comments, though.


Now that one I understand

Post 6

~ jwf ~ scribblo ergo sum

>> transubstantiation <<

Yeah I went to the transupstantiation but the transub had already left the stantiation.

smiley - musicalnote
And the train that goes to Morrow
is a mile upon its way...


>> pure art lies in the expectation of what one is about to receive <<

Seriously, do you mean for the artist in the act of creation or that the viewer of an established artpiece is always disappointed by the hype and context in which it is viewed?

Be warned, either way I'm gonna disagree with ya, I just thought we should first agree on what you meant.

smiley - biggrin
~jwf~


Now that one I understand

Post 7

Post Team

I'm sorry, it is probably my fault.

Spimcoot sends in perfectly legible text, but it is too byte-laden. So, I need to reduce its size to make it acceptable to the h2g2 servers!

I do my best, but I'm not perfect when it comes to messing with load times etc, etc. smiley - winkeye

shazz smiley - thepost


Now that one I understand

Post 8

DoctorMO (Keeper of the Computer, Guru, Community Artist)

hmmm, PNG does a good job normaly with these kinds of images, low number of colours and solid colour hither and tither.

What a pitty smiley - winkeye


I agree with Spimcoot, many a time you can draw a pile of nonsense lines and it can come out as a masterfull work, just by sujestive colours/objects/settings...

-- DoctorMO --


Now that one I understand

Post 9

spimcoot

Sigh, I still don't understand why black and white jpegs are so much bigger than colour ones.

But...

~jwf~: you can't very well disagree with artists finding that their own work falls short of their own expectations. Woody Allen famously refuses to watch his own films. When people say to him, 'but they're great' he replies, 'but you don't know what I had in my head'. However, this is not what I meant. My transubstantiation comment was really drawn from my experience of watching film and TV trailers. Sometimes, from the group of disparate images, I imagine that I'm going to see something far beyond what I can imagine. It's possibly a Salieri like feeling of being able to grasp genius without producing it. Almost inevitably the actual work falls short of the impossibly high standard which I've set for it. In static art works there is a lot more room for personal interpretation in situ and so this doesn't hold. Unless the viewer receives only a fragmented view (such as illegible text) and is thus free to receive a burst of non specific genius from their own subconcious, transforming the thin wafer and cheap red wine with which they're fed into the flesh and blood of Christ.

Anyone who pays attention to criticism deserves what they get.


Now that one I understand

Post 10

~ jwf ~ scribblo ergo sum

>> ~jwf~: you can't very well disagree with artists finding that their own work falls short of their own expectations <<

No I can't, I know the feeling all too well. It is a most discouraging and heartsinking well.

>> Anyone who pays attention to criticism deserves what they get. <<

This I also know to be true.
So since I cannot argue this point either, perhaps I'll suggest that point #2, 'pay no attention to criticism', ought to be expanded to include point #1, 'self critisism is the worst'.

A revised expression then might be, 'Anyone who needs to heed critics must be ingoring their own harsh self-judgement'.

My perverse logic has no doubt distorted the meaning somewhat. smiley - winkeye

peace
~jwf~


Now that one I understand

Post 11

DoctorMO (Keeper of the Computer, Guru, Community Artist)

Only too often does it happen, shame realy, Thinking about conecting my brain upto a Seiral port and seeing it I can draw that way smiley - winkeye

-- DoctorMO --


Key: Complain about this post

More Conversations for Eustace

Write an Entry

"The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy is a wholly remarkable book. It has been compiled and recompiled many times and under many different editorships. It contains contributions from countless numbers of travellers and researchers."

Write an entry
Read more