 |
|
You are not logged in! F.A.Q Log in Register |
 |
|
 |
 Now online (1)DADONCK ...and 358 guests Last 5 registered Oplandisks nothingstar N_loop yipe foxtrotromeo Browse members... |
 |
Members 8025Messages 2613454 Today 7 Topics 127500 |
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
I was wondering what people's views were on the growing trend for the demand for creative arts to be fulfilled by people who are doing things that they love, as opposed to professionals who have to charge an additional premium "to live off", on top of what is necessary to deliver what we care about (the actual art). In many goods and services I buy, I want a pro with a lot of experience and ability, who has done this for 8 hours a day for years. I wouldn't be keen on having a "carpenter" working on load bearing beams in my house who just 'messed around with wood as a hobby'. Likewise, if the person spannering my motorcycles is just a hobbyist, I can probably do it just as well myself. When it comes to music, comedy writing, youtube videos, etc. there is so much material of a 'nearly pro' standard, by people who are just doing it out of love, that I just don't feel it's worth paying people to do it. -Does this trend make us devalue art? -Will "artist" still be a viable career option in 20 years time for anything other than the most capable and populist 0.01%? -Is this a good thing? Perhaps as a 'consumer', you can't see any difference in quality? -Is it a bad thing? Will a blogger ever be as good as a journalist at The Times? I just think this is an interesting topic and don't see it discussed very much. I wonder what you all think about it? |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
That's a very interesting question. I've always felt art is something that is secondary in life. It's not something that puts food and water in your stomach, walls and heat around you at night and it doesn't keep someone bigger, stronger and more ruthless than you from taking what's yours. In fact, it's something that one gets to enjoy only after doing whatever we do to make sure the above concerns dealt with. Because art is so subjective it can't even be reliably priced. The talented engineer's design can be shown to cut costs while increasing reliability etc etc, it's objective. Art has now value outside of what any given person perceives. What this distills to, for me, is that art can safely be pushed to the realm of idle hobby. The argument can be made that artists need to do their art full time to be at their prime, but I've found that some of my favorite art (music, in this case) is produced by people who have full time jobs and simply get creative in their own time. -Does this trend make us devalue art? No. If you like something, you like it. The end. -Will "artist" still be a viable career option in 20 years time for anything other than the most capable and populist 0.01%? I hope not. I've never felt that it should be considered a viable career. -Is this a good thing? Perhaps as a 'consumer', you can't see any difference in quality? It's irrelevant. There will always be people being creative in their own time on the side, and there will always be people who enjoy what they create. -Is it a bad thing? Will a blogger ever be as good as a journalist at The Times? I've read plenty of blogs that far outstrip the coverage and analysis of major news organizations. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
P.S. I say this as someone who went to university to study both a vocation and an avocation. Just before I left for school my bassoon teacher (who had retired from the DSO) gave me very prophetic advice. He asked me what I was going to study and I replied both bassoon performance and engineering. When he heard about the second degree he looked relieved and told me if he could go back in time he'd never have become a musician because, even though he was lucky enough to have made it, it's just not a safe bet. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Real quality sells eventually i think..the problem are the masses: do they want quality or are they satisfied with the common standards? If so there will be tough times for a lot of artists to keep their heads up. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
the invisible common thread is the internet, and how it's shifted the balance of power in distribution. anyone can publish on youtube. it's visible to the whole world, immediately. same goes for blogs, soundcloud, bandcamp, etc. you can almost draw a trend line if you plot back to cdbaby as a halfway point. used to be you found tunes through radio or record stores, which have limited bandwidth. the heavy competition and limited airspace made it impossible to waffle in the middle -- go pro or go home. quality is there, and it will always be there. the feeling that art has gotten watered down is an illusion -- we just have to filter out a lot more junk. it used to be silence outside of official channels; a black backdrop that made the few sources of mass media clear and obvious. now it's cacophony -- millions of kids with justin bieber haircuts on youtube. it's white static instead of black space, and you have to keep moving to see anything, like a bird. however, i still feel the net result will be positive. it's not like those with talent have given up. quite the opposite -- now they can focus on art, instead of fighting to get on the radio. this lets talented noodlers edge in. i do suppose it makes the idea of being an artist less seductive (since it's less exclusive) but it was a bit over-hyped anyways. people compensate for their lack of understanding of art by worshiping it. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Professional art is decoration - art's art. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"...but I've found that some of my favorite art (music, in this case) is produced by people who have full time jobs and simply get creative in their own time. " I tend to agree with this statement too. I think that in many respects, when you have a 'hobbyist' you tend to get that "one man's vision" more often than not; even when there are multiple people contributing towards a project (whether they're paid for their work on it or not) you don't tend to get the 'death by committee' directionless stuff by the amateurs. There's also the matter of what 'amateur' means to consider, too: originally amateur just meant someone doing something for love (as opposed to payment) and wasn't derogatory, or indicative of 'lacking in skill' the way it tends to be used today. In many fields, short of not wanting the person making what I use to be miserable or a slave*, it doesn't matter to the end product whether the person doing it loves it. All that matters is their competence: Do you want to be operated on by the world-weary surgeon with 30 years experience for whom this procedure is a doddle, but they're bored of it and thinking of retiring or an amateur, who is really fascinated by and has a passion for the human body, but is less capable technically? :) Art is probably the only area where this isn't the case. I'm sure we can all think of instances where an artist's later efforts may be better from a technical perspective as they have gotten more skilled and experienced, yet it simply doesn't affect you as much as it lacks that "x factor" and the passion of their earlier work. *and even then, that's simply a moral aspect for me as a consumer; not one that necessarily tangibly affects the quality of the finished work. I remember being in an engineer's workshop, looking at a really cheap motorcycle exhaust and admiring the welds. He said, "Of course they're beautiful, the poor bastard who made this does nothing but that, 12 hours a day, 6 days a week." |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
in reading about james brown, sun ra, etc. i realized that all those guys worked immensely fucking hard. brutally hard. sometimes, they had to walk into the studio and do shit in a single take -- the whole band -- because that's all the chance they were given. you just had to be 112% dialed in if you wanted any sort of success. the loss of that pressure is both good and bad. good: many of the talented [s]amateurs[/s] PROSUMERS we enjoy today might have simply gotten a real job, if faced with that sort of hurdle. the bad: there's far less incentive to try and reach max human potential, olympic athlete style. the people that do tend to be driven to the point of mental instability. and i think this is what you're getting at: if you want to be on the radio now, you don't have to know music like james brown. you still have to work just as hard, but it's more about managing your image and branded revenue streams, e.g. you're somewhere between a professional famous person and a CEO. this gets into steinvordhose's somewhat snarky comment -- can professional art / radio music be art? sure. just 'cos you paid for it, 'cos someone makes a living off of it, does not immediately rob it of all value. the definition of art is an irritating topic, which is why no one's stepped up with a proper one here. i'll let someone else have that |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
p.s. the phrase "professional art" makes me think of thomas kinkade. called "the painter of light," he downed vodka, valium, and jesus, painted the warm fuzzy vibe, and then became massively rich selling cozy comfort to christian housewives. for many reasons, kinkade disgusts me. it's the hypocrisy (bigging up jesus while preferring valium), it's his cloying, saccharine style (i feel manipulated, almost), but mostly it's just his emptiness. i feel like the guy was in a position to direct the course of mankind in his own small way; instead he contributed to the lockdown mentality by keeping people distracted and happy. never mind the horrible things people do in the name of your religion, missus, here's a comforting vignette to hang by your TV. however, as much as he bugs me, kinkade really did have talent. i'd say his stuff was art, even if it was poisonous art. as opposed to damien hirst, who is not an artist (he's a con artist). |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
There's an oldish couple on my street who have lived for the last twenty years on (him) selling pencil drawings of buildings, and (her) doing tarot/palm readings.. half reckon sometimes the actual 'art' is having a good life doing what u like,happy people are pretty beneficial to humanity. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
|
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
funnily enough i had a quick scan of the satanic bible the other night & la vey knew how to rake it in:) |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
was like 'have a look at this', but was like,neh |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
"i had a quick scan of the satanic bible the other night" is one of the best sentences |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
it's an indication that capitalism needs to be destroyed |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
are we talking ambrose bierce or some wiccan shit |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
| |||||||||
|
|
Capitalism of art, perhaps. I still maintain I want a pro designing my bridges and operating on me. |
||||||||
|
|
|||||||||
|
Messageboard index
|
|||||||||
