Techies and critics

5

Технари и искусствоведы

About the antagonisms and misunderstandings between techies and artists painted many, but perhaps most cleverly, succinctly and correctly in a wonderful book, H snow’s “Two cultures”. I can only confirm that, in my opinion, and in Leningrad it was the same…

Of course interesting are those others, if they tend to be creative. In my experience, creative people are mostly among those involved in science and technology. But in the art world, Bohemia is almost not to find. In the technique of unacceptable stupidity and don’t like it: incorrectly assembled electrical node, turned on – he did not work or, worse, blesnula. Unpleasant, better not to think about it. Communication with technology teaches us that regardless of previous achievements incorrectness gets too rough on the hands.

A “Black square” in the picture, not perishing, not objectively verifiable, its significance, as the positivists, not verifiable, and can be about it, without losing face, to debate endlessly.

For example, to feel the beauty of the process to the phase control bridge circuit Larionov should at least be smart and study a lot. And to shed a tear before touching the canvas on the domestic theme, or by linking from the beard hair, to talk about the unknowable, the chancre, you can be absolutely ignorant. Cheap and cheerful!

Of course, in my view, Physics does not necessarily techies.

So in his youth (60gody) for three years I-techie managed to walk to the Hermitage on a series of lectures on artists of different times and peoples, where had the opportunity to listen to highly intelligent historians and art critics. Before their erudition and breadth of Outlook it was impossible not to admire. At that time, due to the bipolar ideology very amazing and brave didn’t seem like enough multicolor objective assessment of history, especially in the many daring scoop Parallels with the middle ages. Were jealous of their historical knowledge, fortitude, ambition, courage, and sometimes fanaticism. And, I think, to call any of them Too would be a grave insult.

But, no problem! Physics and poetry never fought because were carried out in a purely different flocks.

www.proza.ru/2010/01/09/225

Waiting for comments

 

Boris Slutsky:

PHYSICS AND POETRY

1959

 

Something physics held in high esteem.

Something lyrics in the paddock.

It is not a dry calculation,

the world law.

It means that something is not revealed

we are, what we ought to be!

So feeble wings

our sentimental iambic,

and pegasova flight

don’t take off our horses…

That’s just physics in high esteem,

is a lyric in the paddock.

It is self-evident.

To argue is simply useless.

So do not even shame

but rather interesting

to see how, like foam,

our fall rhymes

and greatness exponentially

retreats in logarithms.

 

But Our Troll Good# wisely explained that”the Main value of “Physicists” – efficiency, “Lyrics” – reflection.

But they still target different activities: some – human freedom in relations with matter, and God from them – Prometheus; another is the freedom of the human spirit that bequeathed the divine Orpheus…))” =IN both!

 

“The trouble starts when the lyrics themselves physicists”.= good point…

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here