Best laid plans and all that. The large section of background I’m currently working on, I had planned doing in light cocoa, and ultra light mocha. In a stroke of brilliant idiocy, I somehow managed to completely forget about the light cocoa thread when I stocked up on the colours needed for this bit of the tree quilt. Normally, this wouldn’t be a problem, I’d just get to Joann’s and get more, but I am dire broke, and will be that way for two weeks. Yes, I could work on another bit for two weeks, but I am motivated, right now, to get this section done. I have to go with these motivated moments, because if I stop working this section, it will just turn into a massive chore of tedium, and I’ll find reasons to put it off.
So, a change of plan. I had just enough light cocoa to tie it into the bottom section of light cocoa. As I have 7 skeins of medium cocoa, medium it is. It always pays to be flexible in the face of fuck-ups.
For an art historian doing their thesis or post-doc in 2500s about early 21st century art, this blog (and your other blogs) would be a treasure trove showing the scene from a different perspective to that of (for example) Mousse Magazine* (an Italian/Worldwide art magazine (articles in both English and Italian))
__
* = I’m not that familiar with art mags, but I do leaf through Mousse every now and then because one of my regular haunts subscribes it. The articles are a bit heavy going for an engineer.
Oh, the pretentiousness of the art world! I can do that too, but it has always bugged the hell out of me, and I reached a point of maximum eyerolling exasperation with it many years ago.
It’s interesting to me, seeing how some galleries are adapting, given the rise of the ‘net, with so many different ways and means for artists to get their work out there and seen, more and more artists are eschewing the whole agent / gallery business. The new models of online galleries are dispensing with the pretentious, bullshit artspeak, and I think that’s a good thing all the way around.
The worst issue ever of Mousse that I’ve seen was one that only featured writing by artists, with almost no pics.
Writing is bloody difficult in any language and writing plain and easy to understand text about complicated subjects is especially difficult. Of course, pretentiousness goes deeper that just bad writing and is partly separate from the writing stuff.
I think I’m guilty of being somewhat pretentious and stilted, even though I could claim I love wordplay and try to find something more elaborate and to the point than just “good” or “great” to say about what I see or hear.
I don’t think being a bit stilted is at all the same; I often find myself at a complete loss for words, and the rest of the time, it’s quite obvious I’m no writer. I think it’s possible to speak eloquently, plainly, and concisely without diving deep into pretension. One thing which really helped me in being able to express myself in this regard was writing critiques at photoSig. You have to go deeper than ‘good’ or ‘great’ (or ‘bad’ / ‘poor’), and it’s a surprisingly difficult exercise.
The art world is noted for its depth of pretentious bullshit. This stems from art always being a hobby for the obscenely wealthy, going back centuries on end.
Whilst I concur that, or something similar, seems quite plausible, do you happen to have any citations or resources on the matter? Please note I’m not saying you are incorrect. I have very little idea. My immediate concern here is I am always(?) suspicious of “single-cause” answers / reasons for human actions / behaviours; very few people or issues are quite as binary (two mutually exclusive values) as those sorts of answers / reasons seem to imply…
The relationship between the art work as finally released and as initially envisioned by the artist -- it’s sometimes unrecognizable. I think it’s so interesting when we occasionally get a peek into another artist’s process: “Oooh, why did you use such a daring color there?” “I ran out of thread.” Oh. I invented cubism because I tried to sketch while I was on shrooms. That sort of thing.
Blf @ 5:
Nope. That’s based on personal experience, so take with as much salt as necessary. You will find most other artists have the same experience, regarding seriously wealthy assholes sniffing on about art, deciding what’s “worthy” and what isn’t, and making up pretentious shit about why this, that or other is “great”. Art is funded by those with money, and the artist / patron system is a very old one indeed.
Marcus @ 6:
That’s so much more of it than people think, but most people don’t want to hear that, they want to hear about your ‘deep, mystical process’ or some such bullshit. No one wants to hear “Oh, that painting. I was in a really bad mood that day.”
If you want a glimpse into the money aspect of art, this is a good place to read: https://news.artnet.com/
If memory serves me right (I seem to be wrong! (see correction below)), Picasso signed and gave away numerous signed blank canvases. I think that was a great “feck you”, not only to the monied arseholes, but to the critics and authenticators.
(Admittedly, Picasso himself was quite wealthy, so he could afford that — and other — “feck yous”…)
Correction: It was Dalí who signed numerous (thousands?) of blank sheets / canvases. (There are unsubstantiated claims Dalí was tricked or forced into doing so, but I would not be surprised if the alleged tricking / forcing is an invented “cover story” to explain away incorrect authentications.) Picasso was notoriously non-cooperative in authenticating or signing his own works.
Somewhat related, 500-year-old Albrecht Dürer engraving found in French flea market:
I remember you noting how much time you had put into this previously, but is the thread really specialized?
If I may ask, (I know you mentioned you order much of it online), how much does this type of thread cost/skien?
CC, I only use DMC, in this case, DMC cotton. It’s what I’ve used since I was very young, and I’m accustomed to their quality. When I come across it, I have used other brands, which are vintage. (Now and then I come across a stash of very old embroidery thread at thrift stores, some of it going back to the 1930s.) Some of that vintage thread is in the tree quilt:
https://needleprovocateur.wordpress.com/2015/08/08/knot-vintage/ and https://needleprovocateur.wordpress.com/2015/08/28/star-gets-to-shine/ -- I still have a very healthy stash of vintage thread, but the colours I have aren’t what I need right now.
Quality really does matter when it comes to thread, just like anything else. DMC has a consistent quality of fiber, dye, and range of colours. Online, I can get most skeins for 0.49 cents, but at the local Joann’s, it’s 0.70 cents to one dollar per skein. When I’m doing candlewick knots, one skein, which is 8 m / 8.7 yards, will cover a 2″ x 1″ area.
Shit, do you have Patreon, paypal or something? I’ll kick in to add to your yarn fund. :) I love this series and want to see it finished (although really, I may like the WIP discussion more). ;)
That’s code for “The thread has to be chewed a precise number of times by a left-pawed brown-and-white young male rat.” How many times it has to be chewed is a Guide secret, including which Guide considers it secret.
Guild, not Guide. Twice. Geeesh!
CC:
No, I don’t. One of these days. Thanks so much! I really enjoy these conversations too.
Blf:
Oh no, no. The Guild of Thread Chewers is not allowed anywhere near the precious thread. What rats do to embroidery thread is a crime.
Typical diversionary misinformation. There is no such Guild and unchewed thread is almost useless, serving only as something to chew on.
Yes, if not chewed the precisely correct number of times, the relevant Guild gets very upset. Assassins are said to sometimes be engaged. There are persistent stories peas are used.