[acousticrock87]

Originally Posted by This Is Not Here

You've made some fine points, but thats not fair - They're not unmotivated or lazy, they're just doing other things with their lives than drawing pretty pictures. Y'know, like doing a job, raising a family.

You're right. I was more describing myself in that instance. I wish I were an artist, but I'm so lazy it's painful. But yeah, I should give everyone the benefit of the doubt, because more often than not they simply have priorities.

[demonrail666]

Originally Posted by This Is Not Here

How often, in proportion to painters, do you hear conceptual, installation etc. artists being described as talented? No often enough, anyway.

You're right that artists not working in paint tend to be fairly heavily stigmatised because of their rejection of a 'traditional' medium. More generally though, I think that the sad fact is that most artists, regardless of whether they're painters, sculptors, conceptualists, whatever, simply aren't all that good at it. I mean, in terms of living artists, there are a vast number that are enormously successful but it's doubtful that many of them will go on to be recognised as being anything particularly special in years to come. Gerhard Richter and Bruce Nauman maybe, but not many others. My point is that anyone can be trained to become an artist, just as anyone can be trained to become a guitarist. And with dedication and the right training, they can probably be quite successful at it, at least on a commercial level. I just don't think you can equip someone with an insight into what they're doing that will enable them to transcend their training and dedication. You can give them stuff and they can absorb it, but what they ultimately end up doing with it is something else altogether.

[Lurker]

Damien Hirst is an entertainer. Tracey Emin is still a teenager.

[demonrail666]

Originally Posted by Lurker

Damien Hirst is an entertainer. Tracey Emin is still a teenager.

Tracey Emin is an entertaining teenager. Damien Hirst entertains teenagers.

[Lurker]

Haha that's brilliant! Absolutely perfect, spot on!

[Lurker]

Ah I can't rep you for it.

[Lurker]

I would say most 'art' today is actually entertainment based on this definition of mine: art has to either attempt to be beautiful or attempt to express something (this can be anything, a feeling, an idea, a political opinion etc however complex or simple) or attempt to do both these things at once. A piece of art can also attempt to be ugly/repulsive but only in the occasion when something is being 'said' in it otherwise there is no reason for it - why put yourself through suffering by looking at something ugly that has no aim behind it? Someone like Damien Hirst doesn't do any of these things so he isn't an artist; his 'art' is there as a diversion for the masses; it is an opportunity for the masses for self-congratulatory pseudo-musing. He clearly plucks any random thing that pops into his mind and then gets other people to make it.

EDIT - Failing at an attempt ie creating something shit but still attempting to be beautiful still counts as art as does trying to express something but failing to get it across. It doesn't count as good art though.

[demonrail666]

Originally Posted by Lurker

Ah I can't rep you for it.

Had I known that, I wouldn't have bothered!

Either way. I can't help noticing that Roberts is raising the bar quite considerably at the moment:

 

[Lurker]

Wow that's a really nice picture, she looks lovely. Don't worry, I'll rep you for it in the future.

[This Is Not Here]

Dude shes the most ugly one!

[This Is Not Here]

But really talented.


Ha ha.

[demonrail666]

At first I wasn't actually convinced that it was her so I checked a group picture and, indeed it is.

 

In terms of Damien Hirst, I tend to think he's someone who has done some great stuff but that his reputation has become almost terminally stained by his media profile. People just don't seem to trust the bugger. In that sense he sort of reminds me of Gordon Ramsey: someone else who seems to have become more famous as a parody of themselves, rather than for what they actually do quite well.

[demonrail666]

Originally Posted by This Is Not Here

Dude shes the most ugly one!

PHILISTINE!

[Lurker]

Originally Posted by demonrail666

At first I wasn't actually convinced that it was her so I checked a group picture and, indeed it is.

 

In terms of Damien Hirst, I tend to think he's someone who has done some great stuff but that his reputation has become almost terminally stained by his media profile. People just don't seem to trust the bugger. In that sense he sort of reminds me of Gordon Ramsey: someone else who seems to have become more famous as a parody of themselves, rather than for what they actually do quite well.

I pretty much only have a negative view of him.

[acousticrock87]

I don't think I could possibly claim that Damien Hirst is not an artist. I don't like his stuff, nor do I find it interesting or expressive, but if I can't call him an artist then what is he? I believe that an artist is anyone who claims to create art, but in exchange for such a broad definition, I'm quick to say that an artist is a talentless hack.

[Decayed Rhapsody]

I stumbled upon a Valerie Solanas-themed house party once and some chick was seriously advocating resurrecting her to execute Damien Hirst and Jeff Koons.

[Toilet & Bowels]

Originally Posted by Decayed Rhapsody

I stumbled upon a Valerie Solanas-themed house party once and some chick was seriously advocating resurrecting her to execute Damien Hirst and Jeff Koons.

Sign me up, i'm sure i could come up with a list as long as your arm of further candidates once koons and hirst have been despatched with

[Toilet & Bowels]

Originally Posted by This Is Not Here

So what's the fucking message for all those out there that want to express themselves, and 'create'? ...

Practice makes perfect, practice your instrument or your painting style - but you might aswell quit at the first hurdle, the first difficultly you come across, because it just means your not talented. No point carrying on further to see if you get better at it, because if you're not gifted, the more you work at it the more time you waste. Give up. Give up now. Only certain people can create. Nobody knows who these people are, everyone thinks they're someone different. But just give up.

What IS NOT pig-headed about that?

No the point is to do these thing because you enjoy them not because you're on a quest for glory. There is not set path for creating art but to suggest that everyone is equally capable is naive at best.

[Toilet & Bowels]

Originally Posted by Lurker

Some people are just idiots. Some people are better than others. I'm not a communist.

What's the connection to communism?

[Toilet & Bowels]

Originally Posted by This Is Not Here

I may have a good chance. But not likely, granted. But that example is a TOTALLY different ball-game (so to speak!) than what we're discussing here. Firstly, whilst I'd be quite likely to grasp the level of football theory and tactics Beckham has, because all human brains are capable of being taught things at varying speeds, being a footballer has to do with other factors. Physical factors, and all people are physically different, my body might not be (and lets face it, isn't) capable of running as damned fast as he can, I might not have same agility, and my stamina might not last for darting pointlessly around a field for 90 minutes.
Creativity on the other hand is almost totally a mental thing. As I said before all people can be taught to do things, and in the case of drawing, everyone has arms they can freely move around, what more do you need to becoming as "talented" as the people you've always been told are inherently better at stuff than you?

I think what you're saying betrays either that you are uncomfortable with being more capable at some things than other people, or that you are too much of a big head to be able to accept that there are other people who will always be better at certain things than you are, no matter how hard you try, and judging by your responses i'd say it's more likely to be the latter.