Art vs Invention
18-Aug-88 15:59:40
Sb: #6861-Art vs Invention
Fm: Thomas Holaday 70407,534
To: Don Curtis/SYSOP 76703,4321
Edison invented the lightbulb, not with sketches or standing back and
cogitating (inspiration) but by building 15,000 lightbulbs of different
materials and marketing the one that burned the best.
Josiah Wedgewood re-invented white porcelain without the secret of the
Chinese (that's why the English call their dishes "China") by trying something
like 473 different formulae. You can see his notebooks in the Wedgewood
museum. It's easier to re-invent something, you can guess what the folks you're
copying are starting with by talking to sailors. His black glaze took another
decade or two.
This is invention-to-order. Not tap tap here, tap tap there, but build a
prototype, and another, another, or make a batch of different glazes and fire
them, and another, until you get one you like. Jazz, sculpture, literature,
are _nothing_ like that. When Edison tries a new filament, he does not know
until he turns on the electricity whether it's going to finally be the one.
When Tolstoy writes a paragraph, he is _not_ exploring the unknown.
I believe, but don't know how to prove, that the difficulty non-artists have
with realizing the images in their minds is that the image is "really" much
less defined than they think it is. What one learns in art school in addition
to draftsmanship is how to fool the viewer into seeing richness and detail in a
painting by suggestion, so that the picture is completed in the viewer's mind.
Gosh, I sound like an Infocom ad. If you have never experimented with the grid
method of copying a photograph used by the photorealists, you may be surprised
at how well you can do on your first effort. If you had the knack for holding
in your imagination the image you wish to copy the way you can hold a grid over
a photograph, you could "copy" the mental image in the same way. But you'd
also have a visual imagination that worked differently from your eyes, since
your eyes do not see much more than a little disk of the field of view in full
focus, while you'd be making a painting that would be all in focus wherever you
look. That's rare.