bribrius
Been spending a lot of time on here!
- Joined
- Jan 12, 2014
- Messages
- 8,709
- Reaction score
- 1,311
- Can others edit my Photos
- Photos NOT OK to edit
you don't wonder if the bar for what is art has been lowered significantly though? I mean what if someone has a piece that really just flat out sucks. It isn't a matter of like or dislike (you can dislike a piece and still appreciate the artists vision and talent). I mean it is something like a five year old would come up with. And the artist, may have no training, no schooling, no experience, nada. Shouldn't their be SOME basic criteria for what a artist is? Some level of talent? Some skill? Some vision and foresight? It seems a title given away, not on merit or earned at all, not based on skill or achievement or creativity. Just given away to anyone that comes up with anything.This. Exactly this.They hand out the title way to easy. Because i take a photo or paint a painting it makes me a artist.
I find it interesting how many people think this, how much "import" is given to the title of "artist."
Personally, I don't give "artist" as a title the same sort of significance, as, say "brain surgeon," which suggest that a person is highly trained and exceptionally qualified to be cutting open people's head and operating on them.
To me, "artist" is more akin to "athlete." It's just something you are, but it doesn't suggest a level of skill.
I've seen athletes who just aren't that skilled--Eddie "The Eagle" Edwards comes to mind. He was an Olympic athlete…and he was…well, terrible seems like such a strong term.
I like Lew's notion that it is the "intent to make art" that is important.
If they are especially GOOD at their intents, I tend to call those people, "highly gifted artists."
I think the mentality stems from the idea that a person can be called out or insulted by saying they aren't what they happen to be...
What I mean is that its similar to how a person who is absolutely horrible or revolting, like a sociopath or serial killer, is said to be "not human" or a person who shows no compassion or care for other's is told they are not a person anymore.
These people are obviously still people, they are still human beings. Just in such a terrible way that noone wishes to refer to them as such as they are considered to degrade the idea of such a thing.
This type of mentality arises in Art as well, people see something they dislike in art and say "That's not Art" because it ruins their mental picture of what art should be; they see an artist who doesn't fit their model of artists so they say: "oh, he's not an artist". Their statements, while not being factual, aren't really claims as much as they are expressions of distaste. (at least in my opinion)