Author Archives: editor

“Good Artists Borrow, Great Artists Steal”

Posted on by

iiiinspired _ left, stella mccartney dress_right, courtney price artwork flipped iiiinspired _ stella mccartney Velvet and silk floor length evening dress1 iiiinspired _ whatshehasfound.tumblr _ courtney price

This is my drawing – and this observant blogger discovered
something interesting enough:

She says:

1 _ art by courtney price. her works are available at rectangular objects.
2 _ stella mccartney brigitte dress, detail. available at stella mccartey.
3 _ the dress and the artwork (flipped verically) side by side.
whether or not the designer was really inspired by this artwork, i don’t know
(i personally think she was), but i kinda think that this kind of
“stealing” is rather legitimate in design… i mean transforming
a work of art into a dress or design.
i remember when i was much younger and drew dresses for fun
(well, i still do) i would use all kinds of things for transforming them into
dresses. think furniture, ceramics, buildings or jewelry.
what’s your opinion? i’m curious.

From
http://iiiinspired.blogspot.com/2013/07/a-little-this-and-that-art-vs-dress.html

ABOUT THE “QUOTE”
“good artists borrow – great artists steal”

 

The Word Paradise

Posted on by

Etymology and semasiology

The word “paradise” entered English from the French paradis, inherited from the Latin paradisus, from Greekparádeisos (παράδεισος), and ultimately from an Old Iranian root, attested in Avestan as pairi.daêza-.[1] The literal meaning of this Eastern Old Iranian language word is “walled (enclosure)”,[1] from pairi- “around” + -diz “to create (a wall)”.[2] The word is not attested in other Old Iranian languages (these may however be hypothetically reconstructed, for example as Old Persian *paridayda-).

By the 6th/5th century BCE, the Old Iranian word had been adopted as Akkadian pardesu and Elamite partetas, “domain”. It subsequently came to indicate walled estates, especially the carefully tended royal parks and menageries. The term eventually appeared in Greek as parádeisos “park for animals” in the Anabasis of the early 4th century BCE Athenian gentleman-scholar Xenophon. Aramaic pardaysa similarly reflects “royal park”.

Hebrew פרדס (pardes) appears thrice in the Tanakh; in the Song of Solomon 4:13, Ecclesiastes 2:5 and Nehemiah 2:8. In those contexts it could be interpreted as an “orchard” or a “fruit garden”.

In the 3rd–1st centuries BCE Septuagint, Greek παράδεισος (parádeisos) was used to translate both Hebrew pardesand Hebrew gan, “garden”: it is from this usage that the use of “paradise” to refer to the Garden of Eden derives. The same usage also appears in Arabic and in theQuran as فردوس (firdaws).

The idea of a walled enclosure was not preserved in most Iranian usage, and generally came to refer to a plantation or other cultivated area, not necessarily walled. For example, the Old Iranian word survives in New Persian pālÄ«z (or “jālÄ«z”), which denotes a vegetable patch. However, the word park, as well as the similar complex of words that have the same indoeuropean root: garden, yard, girdle, orchard, court, etc., all refer simply to a deliberately enclosed area, but not necessarily an area enclosed by walls.

For the connection between these ideas and that of the city, compare German Zaun (“fence”), English town and Dutch tuin (“garden”), or garden/yard with Nordicgarðr and Slavic gard (both “city”).

Empirical and Conceptual Objects

Posted on by

Empirical and conceptual objects
[edit]Objects and their properties

Further information: Problem of universals

The world seems to contain many individual things, both physical, like apples, and abstract such as love and the number 3; the former objects are called particulars. Particulars are said to have attributes, e.g. size, shape, color, location and two particulars may have some such attributes in common. Such attributes, are also termed Universals or Properties; the nature of these, and whether they have any real existence and if so of what kind, is a long-standing issue, realism and nominalismrepresenting opposing views.

Metaphysicians concerned with questions about universals or particulars are interested in the nature of objects and their properties, and the relationship between the two. Some, e.g. Plato, argue that properties are abstract objects, existing outside of spaceand time, to which particular objects bear special relations. David Armstrong holds that universals exist in time and space but only at their instantiation and their discovery is a function of science. Others maintain that particulars are a bundle or collection of properties (specifically, a bundle of properties they have).

Biological literature contains abundant references to taxa (singular “taxon”), groups like the mammals or the poppies. Some authors claim (or at least presuppose) that taxa are real entities, that to say that an animal is included in Mammalia (the scientific name for the mammal group) is to say that it bears a certain relation to Mammalia, an abstract object.[10] Advocates of phylogenetic nomenclature, a more nominalistic view, oppose this reading; in their opinion, calling an animal a mammal is a shorthand way of saying that it is descended from the last common ancestor of, say, humans and platypuses.[11]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metaphysics