Quote:
|
Originally Posted by ngdawg
Preserve masterpieces, etc., but art, to me, is for art's sake, not science's.
|
There was a time when the arts and sciences weren't really looked at as opposing forces. I think a lot of artists are afraid of getting too intellectual and analytical about their work and this feeds the division.
I don't really know much about DaVinci, but I think it's important to apply technology to the understanding of the arts, and as many here will attest, to the
creation of the arts. I listened to a really cool CBC show with a lecture about how visual artists back in the day used to know how to make their own paints or at least knew the composition. Today, we buy paints at a store, and while we have access to a great many colours, there can be something missing by not being so in tune with your materials.
As for thinking Rembrandt is more deserving of notoriety, dawg, I think anyone who knows anything about their field has strong opinions of who gets the short end of the popularity stick. And Hollywood
is usually responsible for perpetuating the hierarchy of "genius."