I would argue that everyone is artistic. Because art is in essence boundless, and what appeals to people are infinitely varied, anything that one creates is art. But what does it really mean to be talented artistically? An entirely separate question... Talent is inextricably, and unfortunately, linked to others' judgments. So, artistic talent can be defined as the ability to purposefully create something that is held in high esteem. But how can an artistic creation even be judged? There are elements of the artist that go into the work that is unknown and will always be a black box to the critic. What one creates has everything to do with one's nature both innate and learned. Thus, for your art to be judged properly, the critics would have to know you. KNOW you. Including your subconscious, of which you are unaware (by definition). Is that even possible? I think we know the answer to that. So I say, leave the talent aspect of being artistic. It is irrelevant. Art critics, take your critiques and shove it. The world does not need you crushing artistic aspirations just because they do not fit the fad that you fancy. That just makes you an arse**le.
Tuesday, May 8, 2007
Art critics are full of it
I would argue that everyone is artistic. Because art is in essence boundless, and what appeals to people are infinitely varied, anything that one creates is art. But what does it really mean to be talented artistically? An entirely separate question... Talent is inextricably, and unfortunately, linked to others' judgments. So, artistic talent can be defined as the ability to purposefully create something that is held in high esteem. But how can an artistic creation even be judged? There are elements of the artist that go into the work that is unknown and will always be a black box to the critic. What one creates has everything to do with one's nature both innate and learned. Thus, for your art to be judged properly, the critics would have to know you. KNOW you. Including your subconscious, of which you are unaware (by definition). Is that even possible? I think we know the answer to that. So I say, leave the talent aspect of being artistic. It is irrelevant. Art critics, take your critiques and shove it. The world does not need you crushing artistic aspirations just because they do not fit the fad that you fancy. That just makes you an arse**le.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Hey, I heard a foreward by the author read from a '71 edition of Lord of the Rings by J.R.R., in which he made a quite similar point. That is that no one knows, or can know, the various influences and resources, major and minor, and their specific interpretation as assembled by an artist in a piece. Therefore we are in good company to insist 'art critics are (indeed) full of it'. :)
Post a Comment