[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index][Subject Index][Author Index]


Since I am the one who apparently started this small debate over the term "paleoartist," I feel compelled to respond to some of the latest comments by Brian Franczek:
I'm not sure if this is what Dave meant, but IMO it's not that the term
  "paleoartist" is "restrictive", as Ed suggests, it's just that it's a
  stupid word. What, exactly, does "paleoartist" mean? Translated literally,
  it means "ancient artist". This is a nonsense phrase, and I can't say I
  ever really cared for it. I prefer the descriptive "paleolife artist"
  (meaning "ancient life artist"), a derivation of "wildlife artist", a term
  long in use to describe that particular branch of illustration/sculpture.
To suggest that "paleoartist" literally translates as "ancient artist" is incorrect.  According to Webster's "paleo" is "a combining form . . . used widely to form compounds, as below, meaning 'involving or dealing with (specified) forms, conditions, phenomena, fossils, etc. of remote, esp. geologic, eras:'"     paleoanthropology, paleobotany, paleobiology . . . Webster's list goes on to include a total of ten  examples, and we all know that they could have listed more.  The term "paleoart" certainly fits as comfortably as say "paleobiology," and the term "paleoartist" is therefore as legitimate as "paleobiologist," which I don't believe any of us would mistake for an ancient biologist and more than we would mistake "paleobiology" for ancient biology.
DINOSAUR MAN**Rich Penney, Paleoartist
dinoman@trail.com**Visit us at SVP '98