I don't see any reason to beat around the bush. This little blog will now be my anger outlet. No more pretending like an artist, no no, from here on out I will be true to my cranky self. Everyone ready? Let's begin:
Things that have been taking up my brain space lately:
1. Why is art valued/devalued based on the artist? Whether or not I like/dislike the artist, I try to look at the art without that preconception. Loren and I discussed this briefly after watching My Kid Could Paint That which is about a four year old who paints and her artwork sells/sold for thousands as abstract/modern art, but then speculation arose that her dad was helping - blah blah blah - artwork price dropped. So the main things issues that this movie brought up to me are: why does some art cost more than other art (furthermore why does this change based on people's perceptions of the artist), why does media have to follow a narrative arch when reporting "news", and finally, why can't I paint like Marla? (I mean, shit is sweet!)
So, here is what I have been thinking about these things. Art is so personal and subjective, that selling it seems arbitrary - how can we put a price on something that is about aesthetics? Furthermore, the beauty of art does not actually change because of information about how is was made or who is made by, so why do people care so much about the back story? Because people aren't buying art for aesthetics, they are buying it for status/prestige/whatever. Any art that I have, I have because I like it, because it does something for me - emotional reaction, intellectual stimulus, etc. Is it wrong to buy art? Is it wrong to buy art to gain social capital? Is it wrong to buy art for any reason other than because you like it? It's hard to say. What I do find interesting is the difference in art-artist relationships across the mediums. How much do we care about directors/writers and films? Not nearly as much as the actors in the films, not as much as musicians and their music. Writers and books - it's complicated, unless it's a big scandal, it doesn't really matter (unless the writer reveals herself to be a total ass hat). Yet, when it comes to paintings, sculptures, photographs - it is ALL about the artist, who is the artist? why are they making this? what does it mean? blah blah blah...
Dear media,
Not all stories have a beginning, middle and end. In fact, few do. Stop forcing this on real life. Sometimes, stories don't have a climax and then resolution, this does not mean that they are not worthy of being reported on. If an audience is losing interest in a story, let the story die. Do not inject it with artificial drama. Your zombie story may eat your brains. Have a little sympathy and respect in your reporting. Kids are not equipped to make decisions, parents make mistakes, but you often times force people into positions so you can make a profit. That is wrong. Yes wrong, as in ethically, morally, whatever word you want. So stop it.
Much love,
Rebecca
I promise to start painting. Finger painting, throw painting, splatter glops of paint everywhere but the canvas painting.
2. I forgot everything else I wanted to say. Except we should all watch Good Burger, someone should buy me the shoes I want, and I need to finish making the christmas tree (pictures to follow).
Kthnxbai!
Download Link classic water cooler manual Free Download PDF
-
*Download classic water cooler manual ebooks Free PDF*
Read classic water cooler manual Epub Internet Archive
Wе hаvе mаdе іt еаѕу fоr уоu tо lооk fоr...
5 years ago

12 comments:
Why do we value art made by certain artists?
Well, why do we value literature written by certain writers? Why do we allow bakers to make our bread? How would you feel if a four-year-old decided she should be your accountant?
In short, we value art made by artists because they have devoted their lives to it. While there is also an aesthetic component involved in art unlike in some other fields, I believe that we can at least respect most professional artists for having studied what they're creating.
It may be cute to have a painting by a four-year-old, but paying thousands of dollars for it is ludicrous. I mean, a four-year-old, at most, could have been painting for what... three years? People need to get a life. Or their own children.
Blah blah blah. A whole lotta unsubstantiated claims goin' on! I think just about every one of your sentences is a gross generalization. Who gives a shit who studied what and for how long? If quantitative amounts of study and devotion were the main system of evaluating art, then the best artists would have to be the oldest ones. What about all the young artists who completely OWN their elders in terms of vibrancy, creativity, or just talent? Furthermore, I'd say that paying thousands of dollars for any painting is ludicrous, and I think more people should allow their four year olds to be their accountants. How DARE you compare making art to being an accountant! That doesn't make the slightest glimmering of sense. I defy you to explain that satisfactorily. Also, you obviously haven't seen this kid's paintings--they are absolutely beautiful.
But if Vanessa Carlton would walk a thousand miles just to be with some dude, I think it's ok for some people to pay thousands of dollars for a really good painting.
And then I learned how to only click the button once.
NOT.
"seattle has learned to pass first and to run the ball second"
Post a Comment