2009/8/6 Máirín Duffy <mairin(a)linuxgrrl.com>:
On Thu, 2009-08-06 at 14:51 -0300, Jayme Ayres wrote:
> When did the proposal, not thought in a discussion to address many
> issues, such as referring the "Great Waves ... ' of Kanagawa or even
> religious issues that I read here on the list.
Most of the art work we've done as a team has been interpreted in ways I
think were never intended (and sometimes I think interpreted in crazily
unexpected ways), even works that had no strong concept underlying them.
I think that's why it's important to seek out critique, for us to
discuss how the artwork is interpreted by others and use that feedback
to tweak the design to send the message we really wanted to send with it
(or at least, avoid a message we know we do not want to send about
Fedora! :) ) I can give you example after example of this - how the
Fedora 8 infinity lines look like the Atari logo, how a starburst in one
person's proposal a while back reminded people of the oppression of the
Japanese empire during WWII, the sulphur looking like poo (well it did
and I'm glad we dropped it :)), there were a few pieces that triggered a
very strong religious interpretation from some folks I don't remember
the specifics of.
If we look, all the arts have a concept that will send anything (bad
or good). And when we're working with many users it gives more room
for numerous interpretations, saying that this or that refers to any
matter religious, political or any other subject that generates some
kind of flame.
I think it's important to get an idea of how works will be interpreted
by Fedora users because they are our ultimate consumers. Even if we
don't agree with the interpretation or don't think their reaction makes
sense, we do need to acknowledge it. It's our choice to live with people
interpreting it that way or if we want to adjust the work to change the
> I based the name and
> made an explicit reference to the code, pasting other elements (such
> as the engraving of Doré) to give an air of superiority to the statue
> and a texture of concrete to harmonize the art.
> Different from when I proposed an art involving the Tower of
> Constantine that was mentioned subjectively applied with some effects
> which referred the technology.
> I know that there is no common consensus in the use of the Statue of
> art, perhaps, because I do not follow the original idea was to do
> something with the theme "mosaic", using a collage of photos may look
> a little "démodé" but for me is I can work and provide, as I have the
> gift of making illustrations.
> The arguments that I have to use this art are little because I am
> thinking more artistically than functionally, and even think that
> artistically I said here that "art is subjective and is easy to
> conceptualize a work of art or art done for a distribution.
> These are my thoughts and I believe that the decision taken by this
> team will be better for everyone.
I'm having a little trouble understanding your meaning here, probably
because of language issues, but I really really hope I haven't
discouraged you at all, like many people have said, it is a really
beautiful wallpaper. I would just like to see it pushed a little bit
more conceptually. Art is definitely subjective, but so is any
communication. I think maybe in art maybe you cannot control people's
taste and whether or not something really appeals to someone in a deep
way, but as a form of communication you do have some control over the
message that it sends irregardless if someone subjectively likes it or
I think my arguments end up here, and as I told the Desing Team know
what is best.
design-team mailing list