(WHY? After all the trouble of looking for it. . . huh)

Anyone could go cross-eyed effortlessly, reading the last entries in this thread,. . . . and end up looking like this: 8-). . . (I think that’s an emoticon that officially means something else – but I’m reassigning it.)

by quoting you i wAs not cAlling you out,,but doodling on the bAck of your envelope,,As you Are no doubt AwAre(!) i Am not the most coherent of
writers,,but i Am very ‘integrity’ in whAt i try to sAy,,perhAps,, since
you show A quirk…………….. such As i do ,, ,, ,, we cAn hAve some shAred epiphAnies,,

. ‘RT

Have given birth to more blushing flowers unseen than a florist on the other side of Mars ……….hmm
ok,I’m feeling “up”…..have discarded wordy’s,moth eaten,fur-lined,djellabah……………………
got the whip…………….mirror neurons,…I have never heard of……….thanks.I am working on a web page to retrieve my gems from “dark unfathomed caves”…..coming your way soon…….

All art is artifact,but not all artifact is Art!

All art is creativitity but not all creativity is art

food,,singing,,dancing etc
banking,,lawyering,, etc
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
all of mans paradoxes hypocracies and oxymoronic
contradictions can be explained by two words,, and “creative” is one of them,,

(the creative is totally blind to mirror neurons,,and that statement (blind) is a bit of a ‘boing’ moment for me
so i choose to stop suddenly,,must absorb)

acknowledging @Des’s point that ‘real’ writing is no less so for sitting in a desk unpublished

it is much the less so for being intended for publication,,intent is the yardstick of art,,

. . . Well if you must have a caste system for artists, then you’ll think it fitting that one of my first thoughts with eyes opening this morning was that Heath Robinson didn’t have an enviable colour sense; also that any attempt by him at representational art was pretty horrible (his lines lack lightness & cunning and the colours border on muddy). A second category of work I’d call strictly schematic/diagrammatic — and the fun is all in the idea, in those. . . But his genius was most expressed most delightfully in what I’d call graceful cartoons . . . Would you — in good conscience — deny cartoonists entry into an artists’ kingdom of heaven? . . . even if images from one or two of his drawings were crucial to my ability to get out of bed this morning, facing a week of irritating obligations (eg., the detestable task of shopping)?

@alarming — I didn’t of course mean art critics when I mentioned skilled writers who know about art as much as artists like you and @Hazlitt do about literature. . . And I did mean skilled even if I said professional writers — acknowledging @Des’s point that ‘real’ writing is no less so for sitting in a desk unpublished.

Wordy, I’ve run out side and am now flagellating my naked body in the icy snow

=== I always like the drawing of string in his pictures – the knots are in exactly the right places so as not to impede the necessary movement of a fly wheel but also to stop it at exactly the right moment. ===

You’re a first-class noticer, @alarming . . . Something that’s struck me only now is that while friends over the years have often included artists who — like you, and one or two others on the books blog — are well-read and unusually good at communicating in text, I’ve rarely met your opposite. I mean, professional writers of any kind able to discuss the ins and outs of some branch or branches of the visual arts in detail.

This is a question for anyone, not just @alarming (who I’m afraid of taxing with too many questions) — . . . Does the need to communicate in text to sell art or get funding of some variety mean that almost any successful visual artist must have, or must develop, a facility with words — whereas writers can get away with complete ignorance of visual communication? . . . Are there m/any writer equivalents of the artists posting about books and literature on literary blogs on, for instance, GU’s art & design blog, which I always mean to make more time for but almost never do?

I’ve never read those descriptions and I’ve got a huge book of his life’s work! But Tingueley is very connected to the European avant-garde of the 50’s and 60’s whereas WHR is one of those extraordinary eccentrics that Britain seems to regularly throw up. I always like the drawing of string in his pictures – the knots are in exactly the right places so as not to impede the necessary movement of a fly wheel but also to stop it at exactly the right moment. These details help you to imagine the machine in movement. A great way of spending time.

Tingueleys drawings in comparison describe nothing other than a blur of movement.

@alarming, you won’t mind, I hope, if I’m a bit sceptical about . . . for instance, these:

=== * “The Wart Chair. A simple apparatus for removing a wart from the top of the head”
* “Resuscitating stale railway scones for redistribution at the station buffets”
* “The multimovement tabby silencer”, which automatically threw water at serenading cats ===

I looked up Tinguely, who made me think of Chaplin and Modern Times . . . couldn’t find a video online – probably because I didn’t have long enough to search.

But I don’t see how he could compete with WHR, with whom I think I’ve been besotted since I was born.

@Suzan, yes I hope Unpub returns soon – recognisably himself. He gets embarrassed about compliments, so I’ll stop there . . . Would be nice to know what the book he did seem to have published was about. Maybe he’s just immersed in the next one.