Having recently made my case at such length for passing over the Nikon D800, I can see how anyone reading my little essay would have been left with the impression that I have no interest whatsoever in the new developments being made possible by the addition of video capability to higher end digital cameras. Such is not the case: while I personally have no interest in being a filmmaker, I'm still able to appreciate the incredible things that can be done with these new tools when in the right hands. Take the video below, for example, shot entirely with Canon's 5D Mark II.
Not Katy Perry, Lady Gaga or Kesha warbling on some auto-tuned rubbish, but like this.
And to think that this is just one of many incredible passages in Bach's St. Matthew Passion! To anyone interested in listening to an even better performance - not just of "Erbarme Dich" but of the whole work - I highly recommend the recording by the Collegium Vocale Gente, conducted by Philippe Herreweghe.
I share completely Thomas Edison's conviction that religion is bunk, but if there were anything with the power to sway me towards religious belief, it would be the existence of sublime works such as this passion or Monteverdi's "Vespers of 1610"; these are compositions of whose authors, one feels justified in quoting the famous passage from Hamlet:
What a piece of work is man. How noble in reason, how infinite in faculties. In form and moving, how express and admirable. In action how like an angel. In apprehension, how like a god.
Indeed, sometimes I find myself wondering how it can be that the greatest composers, painters, writers and scientists, who leave behind works able to astonish, surprise and delight long after their creators are dead, and the dim-witted hordes who love "Twilight", proudly hang Thomas Kinkade paintings on their walls, think Lady Gaga is a rebel and a genius, and follow the fabricated adventures of the Kardashians with rapt attention, can really be said to belong to the same species ...
If you've ever wondered how it is that Sir Ridley Scott has managed so consistently to make awe-inspiring movies - Alien, Blade Runner, Gladiator, Thelma & Louise, Black Hawk Down, American Gangster, etc. - wonder no more: the man is quite simply brilliant, as this interview with Wired magazine reveals. Not only does Scott display a wide-ranging knowledge and understanding of both the history of (and the contemporary developments in) architecture and the various arts, but his in-depth explanations of the rationale behind some of his directorial decisions serves to convince you that virtually nothing is left to chance with a Ridley Scott film: if something in a movie of his happens to strike one as particularly clever or subtle, it's nearly certainly the case that this is because Ridley Scott wanted it so, not merely because a happy accident occurred. Think I'm exaggerating? Just read the article in full and see for yourself.
There are three great American painters whose work I admire above all others: James McNeill Whistler, John Singer Sargeant and Edward Hopper. As such, I'm more than slightly pleased to run into this Slate slideshow/article on Hopper's career which tries to illustrate something of the inner life of a man who went out of his way to give the impression that there were no depths to his work beyond what could be seen on the surface. In his self-effacement as well as his artistic style Edward Hopper offered a refreshing contrast to the school of Jackson Pollock et. al., showing that there were ways to break with tradition other than by passing off random nonsense as "art" through aggressive self-promotion - a plague exemplified in our day by the execrable Turner Prize. Indeed, to quote the Slate article:
"Whether we like it or not," Hopper wrote, "we are all bound to the earth with our experience of life and the reactions of the mind, heart, and eye, and our sensations, by no means, consist entirely of form, color, and design." This was meant as a swipe at the Abstract Expressionists working a few blocks north of Washington Square ...
If you'd asked me two hours ago who Michael Yamashita was, I wouldn't have had the slightest idea, but then I ran into this profile of the man's life and work, which finally led me to his website, and all I can say is WOW. I thought I'd seen my share of highly skilled photographers on Flickr and Photo.net, but compared to even the best of these shooters this guy is on another level entirely. Check out his "The Way of the Samurai" series of photos especially and you'll see what I'm talking about: if 10 years down the line I'm a tenth as good as Yamashita is, I'll be extremely pleased with myself.
Who'd have thought the day would come when the Turner Prize committee would ever select the work of an individual whose efforts are actually worth looking at? Savor the moment while you can, fellow philistines, and take your timing savoring the sight of the bourgeoisie being shocked épater'd by this development ...
The news about the more than $100 million paid for a work by Gustav Klimt serves as a nice counterpoint to the stupidity illustrated by this earlier post. I think it serves especially well to undermine the slander, favored by apologists for the art world's current shameful state, labelling as anti-modernist "reactionaries" all those who aren't willing to pretend to rapture at the sight of pickled sharks, unmade beds, lights going on and off, piles of bricks and even canned faeces.
Or rather, the British Royal Acadamy's: a true story which illustrates the extent of the intellectual bankruptcy of the contemporary British art world.
Britain's Royal Academy of Art put a block of slate on display, topped by a small piece of wood, in the mistaken belief it was a work of art.
The slate and wooden stick was actually a base meant to hold up a laughing human head made by British sculptor David Hensel.
If you are or planning to be in London within the next three weeks, make sure not to miss the Three Emperors exhibit currently taking place at the Royal Academy of Arts.
This magnificent exhibition is devoted to the artistic and cultural riches of Imperial China. Spanning the reigns of three Emperors, Kangxi (1662—1722), Yongzheng (1723—35) and Qianlong (1736—95), it focuses on the most powerful rulers of China’s last dynasty: the Qing.
The student of Chinese history will instantly recognize that these three emperors represent the Qing dynasty at its height, especially Qianlong. Take a look at this picture, this one or this one to see just a little of what the exhibit has to offer; amidst all this cultural splendor, it becomes a little easier to understand why the latter Qing rulers should have been so complacent about the threat posed by the Western "barbarians." The tragedy of course is that no regime has done more to destroy what was worth preserving of China's cultural heritage than the Communist Party which poses as the "restorer" of Chinese fortunes ...
Recent Comments