art thoughts 04-27-08

042708
based on growing exposure to artists and art (and existing elements that surround it all), and experiences here in omaha, nebraska.

‘when did we become so naive as to let our societies crush the credibility and stature of real art and artists?’, and why? it all seemed to become defunct and fall apart once technologies started advancing in art and for societies as a whole-as it is all relative- (1960’s-ish). did it all move too fast, for those who’ve laid out guidelines and criteria in the past, to keep up and adapt formal intellectually sound meaning behind the integrity of art and artists? is money the main underlying factor to the destruction of the necessity of being a full-blooded artist to make art? the answers are so black and white, but the responses to those answers are so childish and evasive, that it would seem to take a near miracle to restore what’s been lost.

‘who gave the kid a crayon?’

when i see peoples work, such as students, for example, too often and almost always i am struck with the question of ‘what am i missing’ or even further ‘what allows them to publicly display these things’. a situation of audacity or ‘balls’, and when there is a price placed on it, it instantly becomes warranted as credible art. it has a price, it is tangible, it is an object that can be purchased and owned, its likely one of a kind, it is art, etc… if not, then it just becomes a mere display of the appreciation of creativity and the pieces themselves, then, not art. sure those students would not want to hear that, but need to, and also need to understand the effects of art as it is created. beginning with that, instead of teaching someone how to use a paint brush, seems more relevant to the esteem of art and artists. ‘let those who don’t live and breathe art, think twice about what they create and how they ever decide to present it, it’s not fon-du.it’s for the good of art as a whole, with all connections in tact, and could furthermore place a seriousness to the understanding of what an artist is and exemplify how critical it is to maintain a societal respectability towards those who are actually creative, and live and breathe art every waking moment, because without those kind of people throughout history, art would be nowhere.and in this day and age, it seems more and more those kinds of people are overshadowed by ‘learn-ed’ art and artists.

‘let’s just keep pumping them out!’ `: )~

in what way do we declare something as art when we often cannot deem its creator an artist.it is easy for a student who, lets say, took a few art classes in college to say ‘i made a few art pieces back in school’.it sounds common.but why is it art?and if its not,what is it?…dabbling in some art…presently, beautiful aesthetic art is tainted with a comical childish sense.as well as the artists themselves, who see themselves influenced by dreams, fantasy, etc. without a serious reflection to history, religion, politics, art influences, etc..or some form of philosophical reference or derivation,the art is just as good as someone who dabbles.so, the credibility becomes an enormous uphill battle to get others, who are generally appreciators of art, to see what you see, or believe and accept your passion as something as credible as those with serious respectable reflections. it often seems that craft also has to be far more developed to equal the credibility to be named as a serious artist.if not the worked can easily get pushed down.which is interesting that one can use a serious reflection and get away with a lot less craft, and also have the content pretty much laid out for them just by picking a good solid serious reflection to ‘dabble in’ and be declared as a real credible artist.it is almost, or is actually,like you can level up,like some sort of game, your knowledge on something, based on those main serious reflections, and ‘mechanically’ become successful as an artist.what is the route you take?the one that is,or, can be laid out for you and all that is necessary is for you to build upon it to somehow find that space to place your own stamp on OR the one you live with day in and day out that generates personality, ‘the heart and soul of you as a unit’, and forces you to react to your creative eye and instigates you to develop something even unknown to you, but the outcome is beautiful and personally unique to you and time itself. the second sounds skiddish, but carries more of the reinforcing elements on ‘who is an artist?’. which is odd that the second takes so much more ‘out of the creative element’ work for success, than does the first.it is almost an intention to ruin dreamers and actual creative people who carry it in their blood. but, what do you do?the longer you last, it seems the more you get pulled into the conscious side of it all…and the work ends up leaning towards the serious reflections.the young wont understand and the old wont care, its those of us in the middle who need to make the changes for the rest to see, but it takes a strength to not succumb, and that is where things tend to fall apart for current day creative people, aside from the fact of too many of us are too socially sensitive to be intellectually critical of publicly displayed works.i bet if even half of the people who displayed their works, received true criticism, their work would not have been displayed, probably by their own choice, but i would bet that they would come back with works far better than their initial ones. and thats what it takes. its so easy, but so hard for people to take and give nurturing respectable criticism. there’s a reason for it and ‘artists’ need to know its for the good of art, both historically and for the integrity of art and artists.

‘anymore, it doesn’t seem to matter, if you’re one in a million…million wins.’ -think about it-

…