Live data from Hacker News

Paul Graham On Two Kinds of Programmers and Painters

cycle-gap.blogspot.com

11–20 of 83 posts

Re: Paul Graham On Two Kinds of Programmers and Painters

#11
post #9
post #5

"Cézanne could not draw, he makes the same drawing mistakes that every one makes in introductory drawing classes." This is not the case. Cézanne could draw exceedingly well. Drawing != photographic representation.

Obviously in this context I'm talking about drawing in the sense of rendering.

Right, but saying they're mistakes implies that he drew that way because he couldn't have rendered if he'd wanted to (your "Occam's razor" explanation). I don't know if that was meant to be tongue in cheek, but it seems kind of unlikely to me.

Re: Paul Graham On Two Kinds of Programmers and Painters

#13
post #9
post #5

"Cézanne could not draw, he makes the same drawing mistakes that every one makes in introductory drawing classes." This is not the case. Cézanne could draw exceedingly well. Drawing != photographic representation.

Obviously in this context I'm talking about drawing in the sense of rendering.

Dude, don't make me have to write another essay.

http://www.frenchdrawings.org/search.php?dwg=460&vol=&#3...

Re: Paul Graham On Two Kinds of Programmers and Painters

#14
post #5

"Cézanne could not draw, he makes the same drawing mistakes that every one makes in introductory drawing classes." This is not the case. Cézanne could draw exceedingly well. Drawing != photographic representation.

let's look at that claim in detail. For example, does this http://www.greatmodernpictures.com/drawinggal15lg.jpg look to you like it was done by someone who couldn't draw? It's pretty darn accurately drafted.

Re: Paul Graham On Two Kinds of Programmers and Painters

#15
post #10
post #6

cmon pg, your interpretation of Cezanne is like Caravaggio talkin about Lisp.

Can you give an example of something I said that you think is false? Or is this just a sort of reverse argument from authority?

Well the claim that Cezanne couldn't draw is pretty obviously contradicted by his sketches, especially when you look at them "in the flesh".

Re: Paul Graham On Two Kinds of Programmers and Painters

#16
post #10
post #6

cmon pg, your interpretation of Cezanne is like Caravaggio talkin about Lisp.

Can you give an example of something I said that you think is false? Or is this just a sort of reverse argument from authority?

False statements you have made about art:

"The paintings made between 1430 and 1500 are still unsurpassed." (easy refutation - go to sistine chapel, look up).

"What made oil paint so exciting, when it first became popular in the fifteenth century, was that you could actually make the finished work from the prototype."

This is not how people painted with oil until the 19th century. It was a very expensive medium requiring careful preparatory work, sketches, and so on.

"Most painters start with a blurry sketch and gradually refine it." - completely unsupported.

"Line drawings are in fact the most difficult visual medium" - yes, carving marble is much easier.

"When oil paint replaced tempera in the fifteenth century, it helped painters to deal with difficult subjects like the human figure because, unlike tempera, oil can be blended and overpainted." - again, this is how oil paint was used much later. At the time it was painted in thin, transparent layers that did not allow the kind of reworking you learned four hundred years later in art class.

And now we have 'Cézanne can't draw" to add to the list.

Many of your other statements about art fall more in the 'not even wrong' category - fatuous generalizations based on your own tastes, but presented as deep insights about the world.

So it is a little disingenuous of you to keep asking for people to point to specific places where you are wrong. The wrong is diffusely and uniformly distributed.

Re: Paul Graham On Two Kinds of Programmers and Painters

#17
post #15
post #10

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you give an example of something I said that you think is false? Or is this just a sort of reverse argument from authority?

Well the claim that Cezanne couldn't draw is pretty obviously contradicted by his sketches, especially when you look at them "in the flesh".

Cezanne had at least six years of classical drawing instruction, where you begin by drawing various geometric forms, move on to making sketches of plaster statuary, and then finally draw from the model. It's a highly technical form of training akin to doing scales all day long on a musical instrument. I'm sure there's a folder in some archive in Aix full of extremely boring and careful studies he did at the time. I've linked the one example I could easily find online above.

Saying Cézanne couldn't draw is a glorious form of missing the point, like saying Stravinsky couldn't hold a tune.

Re: Paul Graham On Two Kinds of Programmers and Painters

#19
post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obviously in this context I'm talking about drawing in the sense of rendering.

Dude, don't make me have to write another essay. http://www.frenchdrawings.org/search.php?dwg=460&vol=&#3...

That is a truly spectacular drawing. Astonishing.

Re: Paul Graham On Two Kinds of Programmers and Painters

#20
seems to me that, if this makes any sense, the interesting question is: why can't you have both?

given that selection for "great art" is over a large number of people, why can't you find someone that is gifted in both areas?

perhaps one somehow counteracts the other (for example, you are praised for "mechanical skills" and so never learn "abstract thinking")?

or perhaps the market values the combination of "poor mechanical skills" with "great abstract skills" because it places the latter in strong relief?

or perhaps you do get people who are both (gerhard richter is the best example i can think of), but that's not enough to meet demand? (or meet fashion?)

or perhaps the numbers just don't work out - the population is just large enough for one or the other, but not both?

or, finally, perhaps the whole basis of the post is, in fact, false?

Post reply on HN