2007-08-20 15:16:13 · 16 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ Philosophy
If you're a concert musician it's mastering the piece.
If you're a student at a Dojo trying to get to the highest level possible, it's mastering the master.
If you're a servant who comes in after his employer's home explodes, then it's piecing together the master.
And if you try to glue together the ivory chess set's white King after that horrible explosion, it's piecing together the piece.
Peace (or piece)
2007-08-20 15:36:25 · answer #1 · answered by zingis 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
The master is the piece. The master has to put all of himself into the piece to truly master it and be able to call himself a Master. The piece is just an expression of the master, a sub-developed extension of the personality, character, and ego.
2007-08-20 15:44:27 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Even a Masterpiece is just a piece of the Master.
2007-08-20 16:11:11 · answer #3 · answered by Kentucky Dave 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If there will be the Master hi will always find the Piece.
2007-08-20 16:10:27 · answer #4 · answered by lbelfer 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
well....I think the real master of pieces here is zingis...I love to play with words and admire the efforts of others who do so....and he has done it soooo well here....AND he shows us that there are many different masters and various pieces...that we see how much there is that does not initially meet the eye...I think the Master of this Piece, the questioner, may find this puzzle had more pieces than he had imagined...
2007-08-22 16:44:41 · answer #5 · answered by Goldberry 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Not either or. If referring to a painting...
The "master" has an inspiration. The inspiration is brought to fruition in the coordination of hand, brush, paint, surface--none of them having singular "powers" or control. The harmony of inspiration, painter, materials creates the painting. The painting, if done with talent & spirit has "value" seen or not seen by others. If a professional artist, the $ value is established by its success, not by the artist. Success is from what the painting evokes in others, mostly subjective. An artist of integrity never "imposes a message" on the public. It's a constantly evolving "circle" with not one element being superior to the other. I could go on, but I won't!
2007-08-20 16:28:52 · answer #6 · answered by Valac Gypsy 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It is both + 1. Without the Master there would be no Peice. Without the Peice nobody would know of the Master. Lastly, without an Audience, there would be nobody to enjoy the MasterPiece.
2007-08-20 15:54:44 · answer #7 · answered by Fortis cadere cedere non potest 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
I've been hooked on answering your intriguing questions...with this one though, I wish you could expand on it to explain it better.
If you put the two words together ... masterpiece...then a few examples would be Leonardo's Mona Lisa, The Last Supper, painted also by Leonardo Da Vinci, and Michael Angelo's masterpiece painting on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel.
p.s. have you ever seen the real life paintings by Robert Bateman? They are spectacular!
2007-08-20 15:48:10 · answer #8 · answered by birdtennis 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It's the piece- if he's truly a master, then he put himself entirely into the piece.
2007-08-20 15:29:23 · answer #9 · answered by writeaway 4 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It is more about money and social contacts than about the piece. The work is usually irrelevant.
Who is supporting the artist or the piece is supporting an investment. In maters of investment, nothing about the art matters, except its existence in a certain price structure.
2007-08-20 15:31:33 · answer #10 · answered by bondioli22 4 · 1⤊ 2⤋