| Original Message: Re: Ahem...... Chihuly, glass, Kirk, Juergen |
|---|
|
I don't believe I suggested that Dale's work was other than exciting. Dale is responsible for glass being seen as a serious medium of art in the twentieth century for sure. No one else can be given as much credit as he in that regard. Many can be joyful for that, myself included. Still This is a bead forum. I come here to read about beads. and see beads. There are many glass art forums out there, and many much better and in focus pictures of Dale's exciting work to be seen than Jamey posted. If one is interested in Dale's work there are mountains of images to be found of it. My question remains. Why is Jamey posting a massive thread of bad pictures of non bead work here? I'd rather read pages and pages of Juergens and Kirks diatribes . At least they are on topic and I find much to think about in them. I'm even coming around to seeing some of Kirks viewpoints as regards Ghana bead things. Perhaps I'm getting old and grinchy, but beads is beads and this is a beads forum. As moderator you suggest taking Kirk or Juergen off the forum for their remarks from time to time, but they stay on topic and a forum should be a place for free exchange of ideas. I see Juergen as being the terminal skeptic on authenticity, and this ain't all bad, but that rubs some wrong. I'm holding my position here. If we go off topic next we'll be talking the palace doors of Abu Dahbi. They are fabulous, they are glass, but they have no place in a bead forum.
respectfully,
art
All rights reserved by Bead Collector Network and its users |
|
|