Seirawan is not the Bob Ross of chess

locrianmenace
DanCruzNYC wrote:
In defense of Bob Ross, I am a painter and most of my friends are artists and painters just so you know the vast majority of artists and painters love and have much respect for Bob Ross. Many people got their first introduction to painting as a little boy or girl from him. His paintings today are quite valuable. Just because the ultra rich are not throwing absurd amounts of money at his work doesn’t mean he’s just a cheap Sunday painter. He certainly was a master of his craft. And yes you could argue it’s Kitsch and simple and lots of people can do it. But that was his style and it made him very popular and famous. I would not compare him to to a park hustler in chess. He was a landscape artist. It’s like going to a guy who was a master in the Ruy Lopez and that’s all he specialized in. Just because he doesn’t know the kings Indian doesn’t make his Spanish knowledge any less relevant.

I don't think art should be measured by whether people are putting a lot of money in it or not, there are many examples of art works which are ridiculously expensive but are weak works.

If you think Bob Ross was a master of his craft, then what about someone like Albert Bierstadt? Don't make me laugh. Bob's paintings look like child play close to real landscape paintings.

 

And I disagree with your comparison, being a master in the Ruy Lopez is only good if your opponent wants to play the Ruy Lopez. Being a master at endgames is vastly superior than being a master in a specific opening in chess.

Bob Ross hasn't convinced me he is a good painter, it seems to me he just chose a path where he can paint easily without being punished for making mistakes (after all, that's why he says there are no mistakes, just happy accidents). If he did that on portraits and paintings like that he would simply cause uncanny valley. He gets away simply because he does landscape paintings. But it's not real quality ones.

locrianmenace
Spelenderwijs wrote:
DanCruzNYC schreef:
In defense of Bob Ross, I am a painter and most of my friends are artists and painters just so you know the vast majority of artists and painters love and have much respect for Bob Ross. Many people got their first introduction to painting as a little boy or girl from him. His paintings today are quite valuable. Just because the ultra rich are not throwing absurd amounts of money at his work doesn’t mean he’s just a cheap Sunday painter. He certainly was a master of his craft. And yes you could argue it’s Kitsch and simple and lots of people can do it. But that was his style and it made him very popular and famous. I would not compare him to to a park hustler in chess. He was a landscape artist. It’s like going to a guy who was a master in the Ruy Lopez and that’s all he specialized in. Just because he doesn’t know the kings Indian doesn’t make his Spanish knowledge any less relevant.

I was just about to say something in defense of Bob, but you beat me to it. I couldn't have said it better anyway 

Go look into Albert Bierstadt or any other real masters on landscape paintings, compare them to Bob Ross, and come to your conclusion.

superchessmachine
locrianmenace wrote:
Some people joke that Yasser Seirawan is like Bob Ross (possibly because of the way he talks), but I find that comparison somewhat insulting.

Bob Ross was only a tv painter with a cheap method to teach, he didn't have any relevance in the art world and no art critic admired him. Ross wasn't delving into the territory of "GM" painters such as Kandinsky, Philip Guston, etc... Bob Ross paintings only take like 20-30 min, but in serious art it takes a lot more than that to do something good.

Analogously, if Yasser Seirawan was like Bob Ross, he would be a weak chess rustler or the type of effortless chess teacher that says: "You can't play ...Nf6 against the Italian because it allows the 'Fried Liver'." (note that I'm saying this because I saw a bad chess lecture like this a while ago, and it wasn't aimed at kids or anything, the teacher simply had no knowledge of the game).

But Seirawan is not someone like this, in fact, he is a GM, which is a very high title and which requires a lot of sacrifice and hard work. Not everyone doing hard work can turn into a GM. Seirawan also made plenty of serious books and serious articles. He is nice guy, but he also has a lot more going on than Bob Ross, which shouldn't even have been famous to start with.

Perhaps he is the jhon cena of chess

Preggo_Basashi
DanCruzNYC wrote:
In defense of Bob Ross, I am a painter and most of my friends are artists and painters just so you know the vast majority of artists and painters love and have much respect for Bob Ross

I mean, his personality and TV show were loved, but not so much his art right?

Ok, maybe it's expensive, but he was famous. I didn't think artists had much respect for his art.

BlargDragon

Art is very intimidating to enter. Bob Ross made it seem approachable. Bob Ross gets you in the door. Bob Ross inspires. The problem is that inspiration only gets you so far. Learning a couple tricks that work in specific ways only gets you so far. 

 

If all you want to do is what Bob Ross did, I don't criticize that at all. One of my biggest annoyances is when people project what they want out of art onto others and criticize them based on that. If you enjoy painting one thing in a casual way and don't carea bout intensive study of art, go for it! That said, if you do want to go beyond that and develop a deeper understanding of art elements and principles, media choices, color theory, various techniques and styles, clinging to Bob Ross will absolutely hold you back.

 

Also, the oil paints marketed under his name are horrible quality and offer a very limited palette that only lets you paint what he paints. If you want good, inexpensive oils, even just to paint what Bob Ross does, buy Gamblin 1980.

locrianmenace
Preggo_Basashi wrote:
DanCruzNYC wrote:
In defense of Bob Ross, I am a painter and most of my friends are artists and painters just so you know the vast majority of artists and painters love and have much respect for Bob Ross

I mean, his personality and TV show were loved, but not so much his art right?

Ok, maybe it's expensive, but he was famous. I didn't think artists had much respect for his art.

I think Bob Ross is somewhat close to Andre Rieu in music. Andre Rieu is charismatic and many people like him because he introduced them to "classical music". I can even find pro musicians that like him. But his concerts have very little quality in terms of music.

Preggo_Basashi

It's neat to find some other people interested in art.

 

I'm no good, I just started, but what's interesting to me is how some of the chess vs art beginner questions and answers are the same.

 

Like a beginner might ask "which single thing should I do to make me a great artist?"

and the answer is "lol, there is no single thing, just try to learn a bit of everything, and after 10 years maybe you'll be OK"

tongue.png

BlargDragon
Preggo_Basashi wrote:

It's neat to find some other people interested in art.

 

I'm no good, I just started, but what's interesting to me is how some of the chess vs art beginner questions and answers are the same.

 

Like a beginner might ask "which single thing should I do to make me a great artist?"

and the answer is "lol, there is no single thing, just try to learn a bit of everything, and after 10 years maybe you'll be OK"

 

Occasionally a good art thread will pop up here, but it's tragically uncommon given how ubiquitous and fascinating art is.

 

What kind of art are you starting with? If you're getting into simple pencil drawing, a really good (and inexpensive) book is Bert Dodson's "Keys to Drawing".

 

Comparing chess to art is a good insight; there's a lot connecting them--also things like the fact that anyone who puts in effort can get pretty good, that there are better and worse ways to practice, and so on. I think it's because art is a more fundamental thing than people usually think of, like everything has "art" in it to one degree or another.

Preggo_Basashi

I want to paint stuff eventually, but some people suggested I learn some basic drawing first, and AFAIK that seems correct, also it's much less expensive tongue.png

 

I'll read the reviews for Dodson's book, thanks for the suggestion!

BlargDragon

Drawing's a great place to start since it's inexpensive and it's a good way to get familiar with the elements and principles of design. That said, you don't need to be able to draw to paint, so don't worry too much about diving right in sooner rather than later. The two are different skills, and both have their own variety of styles and techniques to make them even more diverse. If you don't mind the mess, charcoal can be a fun way of blurring the line between them.

president_max

the duck seems to be good at both.

BlargDragon
president_max wrote:

the duck seems to be good at both.

And mosaic, and printmaking, and sculpture, as I recall. One feather for every talent!

president_max

renaissance duck

null

Pulpofeira

Now, a Rubik's cube.

darkunorthodox88
locrianmenace wrote:
Spelenderwijs wrote:
DanCruzNYC schreef:
In defense of Bob Ross, I am a painter and most of my friends are artists and painters just so you know the vast majority of artists and painters love and have much respect for Bob Ross. Many people got their first introduction to painting as a little boy or girl from him. His paintings today are quite valuable. Just because the ultra rich are not throwing absurd amounts of money at his work doesn’t mean he’s just a cheap Sunday painter. He certainly was a master of his craft. And yes you could argue it’s Kitsch and simple and lots of people can do it. But that was his style and it made him very popular and famous. I would not compare him to to a park hustler in chess. He was a landscape artist. It’s like going to a guy who was a master in the Ruy Lopez and that’s all he specialized in. Just because he doesn’t know the kings Indian doesn’t make his Spanish knowledge any less relevant.

I was just about to say something in defense of Bob, but you beat me to it. I couldn't have said it better anyway 

Go look into Albert Bierstadt or any other real masters on landscape paintings, compare them to Bob Ross, and come to your conclusion.

bob ross is rolling in his grave because you dont like his works.

DeirdreSkye

Bob Ross wasn't the great artist but he was passionate about his work and willing to share what he knew.That alone deserves respect.

 Also I have done art lessons and I can tell you with certainty that what he was doing was neither cheap or easy and 99% of us can't do it.

Preggo_Basashi
BlargDragon wrote:

Drawing's a great place to start since it's inexpensive and it's a good way to get familiar with the elements and principles of design. That said, you don't need to be able to draw to paint, so don't worry too much about diving right in sooner rather than later. The two are different skills, and both have their own variety of styles and techniques to make them even more diverse. If you don't mind the mess, charcoal can be a fun way of blurring the line between them.

Yeah, my aunt actually loved to paint. Every day she was painting. No training at all, and she couldn't draw worth anything haha.

 

But my personality is a little less... free spirited. I actually want to be told "these are the elements, this is how you practice, blah blah blah" then after that I might do whatever, but first I want to learn some stuff.