Art 8 replies

Please wait...

random_soldier1337

I live on Gaming Forums

452 XP

17th June 2008

0 Uploads

2,039 Posts

5 Threads

#1 7 years ago

No this thread has no relation to Silberio's thread whatsoever, in case there is something along the way that insinuates such.

I was just wondering, what do you guys wager is the real reason art is performed. I mean art in general. I know there would be different ways of looking at music and picture art and literary art but just consider it in the general sense.

Now think about the modern days. I don't know but is it just me or did art always exist for the sole purpose of impressing others and making something so horribly abstract and extraneous that it is not supposed to make any sense? Not saying that every piece of art work is like that but it just seems that those are not the only reasons art could or should be performed. But for some reason it just seems like modern society has somewhat bastardized art to be a get rich and/or famous quick scheme, even if the fame is only a bit of prestige amongst a tightly knit group of friends who are people that nobody cares about.

Any thoughts?




Inyri Forge VIP Member

[Insert User Title Here]

55 XP

15th March 2005

0 Uploads

25,940 Posts

0 Threads

#2 7 years ago
random_soldier1337;5590873I don't know but is it just me or did art always exist for the sole purpose of impressing others and making something so horribly abstract and extraneous that it is not supposed to make any sense?

It's just you.

Have you ever created art? It seems to me from your post that you seem to think something is only art if a 'famous' artist makes and sells it. Anyone can make art. Art is creation. Art is so much more than just trying to impress someone (if that's why you're doing it, you're doing it for the wrong reasons).

Just ask anyone her that writes, draws, models, etc. As an example, I don't think Silberio posted his art to impress people. It's sharing.




Andron Taps Forum Mod

Faktrl is Best Pony

261,592 XP

10th September 2007

4 Uploads

21,746 Posts

1,754 Threads

#3 7 years ago

"Art is what happens when you learn... to *dream*." ~ Lord Royal Highness from Spongebob


"I'd shush her zephyr." ~ Zephyr.



random_soldier1337

I live on Gaming Forums

452 XP

17th June 2008

0 Uploads

2,039 Posts

5 Threads

#4 7 years ago

Inyri Forge;5590876It's just you.

Have you ever created art? It seems to me from your post that you seem to think something is only art if a 'famous' artist makes and sells it. Anyone can make art. Art is creation. Art is so much more than just trying to impress someone (if that's why you're doing it, you're doing it for the wrong reasons).

Just ask anyone her that writes, draws, models, etc. As an example, I don't think Silberio posted his art to impress people. It's sharing.

Well then I'm afraid my post was quite misleading. I agreed with that idea to begin with.

However, the point I was trying to bring up was that it seems to me like art isn't performed anymore for the sake of enjoying oneself or as a form of self-expression but rather to make money or gain prestige.

Just look at all the wannabe singers. I don't have anything against people singing if they like to, but the ones who go through American Idol or happen to be "Justin Biebers".

Those are the people I am talking about when I say that art isn't being done for what it should be done for.

I haven't been to any art galleries myself so I am not sure about this but from what entertainment media like TV shows often portray, picture art shouldn't make any sense and should be a bunch of strangely colored shapes floating here and there that make no sense. I mean if it's done right it could probably look like the coolest thing you would see while being horribly intoxicated.

But most of the time (if this case is true about picture art) it seems like the artist is following a strange (and quite frankly not the prettiest) norm set by somebody who actually knew what they were doing with this surreal art form (and did it because they enjoyed it). However, the one following the norm is doing it because seemingly everybody is doing it and becoming successful.

Finally, I don't really think I could properly criticize literature but then again from what I can remember of the English classes I had in high school, every written piece either from now or from the Shakespearean era or anywhere between or before happens to always be over-analyzed over and over again to the point that it isn't even fun to read that piece anymore. And I'm not talking about interpreting a confusingly worded line. I'm talking about all the strange things like literary devices which I can barely seem to remember like iambic pentameter or some other things of the sort.

I suppose that was English class only but still, I'm not sure I see the purpose in analyzing these pieces. Or at least to the point it was done. Grabbing implications and patterns regarding to what the piece could be hinting at or what was the point of it is fine. But when it gets to the point that I'm practically observing every other word to know how the author is used to setting up his sentences, I stop seeing the point.

At that point it doesn't seem like a literary piece can be composed to entertain oneself or others who may want to read it or to simply produce an anecdote with possibly a moral lesson.

I have to say it again, though, that this is the opinion that I have formed from the observation of the general society not because I just happen to believe something in my head.




Silberio VIP Member

Bourée

392,819 XP

9th October 2007

0 Uploads

37,218 Posts

4 Threads

#5 7 years ago

I've found that pretty much true.

Art, specially music, has become more a trend than a way of expressesing oneself; for the sole purpose of selling, as you said, Random Soldier... And it's pretty sad to think on it, but it calms me to know there still are real artists out there, whether it's in music, painting, poetry, etc.

The problem now, IMO, comes when society closes itself on what the Media tells them is art, for example... Yeah, let's take Bieber: People get bombed with the idea that that is music (art) and that's only it, so the musician that puts more than his feeling into it, but is completely different to what media says is art, gets simply lost.

My brother is a poet, he lives in Chile... He's dyslexic, but writes really good poems and really puts feeling into it. He used to put up his poems on buss stops and such, just so people could read them and yeah... Feel something; completely anonymous. Recently, he told me that the opportunities weren't too good, so he just stopped writing as much as before... Which is sad.

I think also, art is too under-appriciated in modern society. I mean in General. It's like people can't see what art really is: Feelings... It makes me sad, because I think that if art could be appriciated as it once was, or the way an artist appriciates it... It'd be a much calmer and nicer world... But oh well...


qjyUJrq.png



Nemmerle Forum Mod

Voice of joy and sunshine

298,365 XP

26th May 2003

0 Uploads

28,147 Posts

5 Threads

#6 7 years ago

Sounds like someone's been watching too much of the Tate-modern and similar galleries.

What about Glennray Tutor? He's a photorealist - as compared to geometric abstractionism and the like, which you seem not to like.

One of his 2005 paintings

That's not a photograph of a comic with some marbles on it, the marbles are part of the painting. - It's not even the whole painting come to think of it.

What about comic art? Dresden Codak for instance. The author even has a blog containing a ridiculous amount of comic/ art theory.

It don't think it's really fair of you to just say they're all in it for the money.

The art world is quite -- diverse -- and sadly the galleries that tend to show up in the media are often just show you the weirdest bits of it. There is some good stuff in them, but by and large - if you're interested in art - it's more the case that the galleries you see on TV probably aren't for you than all art in general is an awful cash-in.




random_soldier1337

I live on Gaming Forums

452 XP

17th June 2008

0 Uploads

2,039 Posts

5 Threads

#7 7 years ago

I know my posts seemed to imply that I blame all of the artists covered in media for being money-whoring individuals but I never meant that. I never explicitly stated that I do. What I meant was the majority of them or at least a part large enough to be fairly significant.




Granyaski VIP Member

High as a kite

107 XP

29th May 2008

0 Uploads

11,881 Posts

1 Threads

#8 7 years ago

To me it sounds like you're venting more at modern art- which requires such as it is awful, useless and crap.

Art does have a purpose- to impress, to inspire, to look good, to capture memories and images, to show your thoughts...

Art has alot of purposes.




Stark98

I would die without GF

138,935 XP

25th March 2005

0 Uploads

13,416 Posts

0 Threads

#9 7 years ago

Art could be seen in many things, like beautiful paintings, stuff that are welded or even beautiful minimal places.

Too bad that some people think art is almost everything.(example below)

I've read in the papers that a woman is sleeping nude with pigs in the mud and she says its art. Dunno, i don't call that art, i just call it bullshit. I haven't seen pictures, just a small youtube clip and it was more like wtf? The reactions below it where actually the same.

I'm not able to say, that's art. But taking a picture of a fly, where it looks gigantic and extremely sharp. That's extremely nice and in my eyes, it's art.

If it gives you a nice feeling, it wakes up an emotion in you, that's art. (not the part where you say wtf?!)