[rick-in-seattle]

The origination of anything worth creating begins with some form of inspiration. Be it visual, verbal, or mental stimulation, ideas have a point of origin.

The argument exists in the art world that no idea is original to the individual.
Our ideas are collages of our life experiences; our childhood, education, even television has its impact.

This point was driven home when I conceived a carving of an apple with a worm tipping his derby. For quite some time I honestly believed it was my original idea free from any outside influence.

Then one day, I was reading a book about a small town I once lived in as a child. There was a famous fruit stand in that town called Tiny’s. The fruit stand burned down many years ago, but there had been a billboard displaying an apple and a worm tipping his derby.

The truly amazing thing about this story is that my carving was a perfect copy of the picture I had seen 45 years earlier.

I can accept that my inspiration is limited by my experiences;
but my ability to create from inspiration is limited only by my experience.

[Smokey]

Rick thats a real interesting posture you have come up with. I wonder if this type of inspiration is only viable with our "original carvings" or is there a little bit of the concept still evident in the "production" carvings (snowmen, santas, and woodspirits) ?

[squbrigg]

There's a set of words that is sure to raise the ire of many folks...."The Art World" ! While you may be quite right in that, our ideas may be a collage of our life's experiences, I have never considered that the work of carvers to be deminished if it was a copy of anothers idea. It is the technical skills, and the artistic interpritation of the piece that I admire. Good example you use BTW! Though knowing the connection between sign and carving would not effect my admiration for your creation

The Art World......envisions a group of "look-down-your-nose" art bureaucrats, who's idea of art is that lad wriggling in wet paint on the floor, or someone that spilled paint on the drop sheet and called it a masterpiece! I once saw a piece in a gallery at an art college/university, where the "artist" poured sand in shapes and circles on the floor! Lord, why did I send my daughter to that school!!! She use to make so much sense!

Bob

[rick-in-seattle]

Smokey,

Yes, I believe my theory holds true in all our creations.

One might say that their idea could not have be conceived by another,
that may be true, but individual experiences combined with shared
conceptions to develop that idea.

Let’s say I suggested you carve a bird; what would you draw upon as reference?

You most likely would not create a bird that had never been seen before, but depending
on your unique experiences, you might. Still, it would be a bird based partly upon bird features that we all would recognize; or it would never be accepted as a bird.

Bob,
I agree with you.
I have a real problem accepting what passes as art today.

[BasketballJones]

I remember reading a while back about a dog walking on a canvas with painted paws and they called that art. I guess it depends on one's artistic interpretation; since my dog did that to the carpet years back while my dad and I painted the living room it could have been interpreted as reasonable grounds to commit violence by mom. I should have claimed our defense as artistic impressionism. Now try and teach a dog to carve and we shall see what is really art.

[Nancy_G]

I suppose there is no such thing as an original Santa.
But a few years ago I was shopping with my sister and when we came out of wally world and it had started snowing. She threw her arms into the air and shouted (an original line ) "Let it snow, let it snow, let it snow".
I knew that had to be a carved Santa.

[Hi_Ho_Sliver]

Sometimes its not the art that wins the awards but the person in the clicque!! Went to the Wickenburg Art Show this weekend and entered my Heron and a pueblo painting, as soon as I walked in, I thought, I wasted my time coming here, ..competition was amazing! One guy was a professional sculptor in clay and had his scuptures of US soldiers during the vietnam period...they were fabulous...but not the kind of thing that should be in a local art show! Obviously no one but another professional could compete with him! Also a number of other outstanding works, one was a beavertail cactus with a pebble covered base, an outstanding cactus flower and a hummingbird, a really beautiful carving....the winner of that class and mine too, was an unpeeled walking stick, with about one foot of unpeeled twisty inserted about hand level and a silver knob (or polished aluminum) of some kind on top, kind of non-descript! Mine and the cactus won an honorable mention. The peoples choice and some other award was a turned pot? So do we ever really know if it is the taste in art that causes the judges to rule the way they do, or their compadres? No complaints here however, received an honorable mention for both the heron and the pueblo painting and really didn't expect anything...or by the way the Bronze soldier won best of show....there was no question in my mind about that one! "Let it snow , let it snow, let it snow"? Now I don't know who sang that, but I would be thinking about carving a Bing Crosby, or Rosemary Clooney or whoever......see some minds just don't work at all! ha ha

[mdallensr]

We've discussed original art and designs before, and it's always an interesting subject. I like to carve realistic animals, and I try to get familiar with them by doing some research in books and the web. After you've seen a lot of photos or drawings of a polar bear, and maybe visited the zoo, what constitutes an original piece of work? How much different does my bear have to be, compared to another's work, to be original? Yes, if I do it, it's "original" just because my style and technique is my own, but if you go to a show and see the same bear carved from a Stiller pattern, is it original? If I draw some ideas and inspiration from a drawing or photo, can my product be original?

Consider the major carving competitions for birds. You must reproduce the bird precisely. The beak length, the eye diameter, the number and placement of feathers, etc, must be accurate. The pose and habitat will be unique, but the bird must be so well reproduced as to be life-like. Clearly, it's the worksmanship, or the artisitic expression, that's most important. But if someone does one that's reminiscent of some other carving, it won't be "original".

Fortunately for me, I don't compete and I don't have to worry about all of this. I give carvings to family and friends, and they don't know or care if the carving is original.

[Hi_Ho_Sliver]

the only problem with being exact to eye shape, beak, head paws anything....is that animals are like people and no two are exactly alike.....when you start doing research on a specific subject and you see many photos of the same bird , animal or ?? you find you end up making your own color and design because each is slightly different...wasn't it a line in the "Robin Hood" movie...."God loves infinite variety!"

[AlArchie]

Well, whatever the snow is doing, congratulations on your awards, Dave! You earned 'em!
I know of what you speak, though...last summer I entered several carvings that I thought were rather good in the county fair, and a stick that I "sort of" carved into a shaman's staff with very abstract faces peeking out from the various knots on the stick, and a collage of fetishes hanging from an antler topper. Least amount of work and thought I've ever put into a piece and it won best of show and got invited to the Mich State Fair competition next summer.......hmmmmmmm, makes, ya wonder!

Al