I'm
all for art as reflection, with or with out message, financial value
etc etc. What I am advocating is a graduation, a sense of perspective
that shifts the usual hierarchy of 'art' at the top, and see's it more
as a intermediate stage before graduation. The idea is all intertwined
with the views that everyone is an artist, notice your audience, take
responsibility for your work, and ask what is it the art of? It is my
opinion that art as known is a conceptual barrier for engaging
with the very real forms of new media messages that don't fit cultural
art stereotypes. i.e the example of PR. The game had been bigger than
the market allows for along time. We know this. time to start changing
the dialogue around it. A good way to do this I'm suggesting is, sure
make art, don't call it that, and don't call your self an artist.
Anything else would be more interesting more relative. More risky. And
while you are at it expose the economics of your production. - Tao Wells
- Maia McDonald, Kemi Soundwater, Simon Marler and 7 others like this.
Catherine Cocker hahahahaha you are a do with a bone ! lololol im sorry im not laughing at you i just think its funny how you slip that in about how an artist might get paid every opportunity you get lol its funny
Wells Tao It's directly relevant, so I slip it in. I get called names a lot. Dog with a bone, self promoter, hippy etc to me they reflect the hurler not me.- Catherine Cocker i wasnt hurling Tao i do find it amusing is all and i respect your opinion and your tenacity thats why i comment
Write a reply...
Catherine Cocker it is good to walk the talk within our own personal awareness i agree transparency is complicated and can be difficult but is essential in the long run, even though you up for attack
Write a reply...- Catherine Cocker i need to ask why Tao, is everybody is supposed to be an artist (or a musician)? but not everybody is an economist or a teacher (and some people definitely aren't teachers or economists and in fact i know people that dont even hear music they dont hear the rhythm or the phrasing or anything,the same goes for art though art can be more accessible)
- Hide 19 Replies
- Wells Tao When I look out the window living in the country, I see nature, everything is nature, given that we are made of 'nature'. But what I am asking what is the quality of that nature, well it is art. The fields of production (of desire) are made from designs carefully agreed to over a great deal of time. There's no escaping making, there's no escaping participating in art.
- Catherine Cocker hear i mean lol i wonder what numbers are like they must be heard being closer to music than art
- Wells Tao the idea of whether or not they are artists, is not interesting to me. What kind of art do they practice is interesting to me. That goes for the mathematican, the farmer the musican the poliitcan.. etc.
Write a reply...
Heike Ngan As with everything, it's all in the eye of the beholder when you're seeking the 'value' of a thing. But when you are compelled from within to create a thing, the outside doesn't matter. It's purely incidental and often quite inconsequential. So do it anyway, either way it doesn't count for aught but naught or everything.
Heike Ngan Yes it is a beast....where creative gift is used to abuse the truth to bend minds towards a pseudo-truth which supports a hidden agenda. So, what is truth the art of?- Heike Ngan The truth of it is that humans deploy this beastly art from very early on...I see it all around me...where people seek to twist reality to justify their errant, vain and manipulating need to be RIGHT.....soooo....how do we find and develop the art of seeing? My own answer to that is complete detachment, which in itself seems clinical, but is pure art, and btw also pure journalism. We should remove from our seeing all that we are feeling when we seek to mirror what is. But we can feel whatever we feel when we take it into ourselves and react.
- Wells Tao it's not necessarily twisted, vain or manipulated, any more than anything else. In fact I am making the bold claim, to encourage debate, that Propaganda is less manipulative in a negative sense that art (generally), because it is what it is and doesn't pretend to be otherwise. I mean art can be many things, but propaganda is very clear, that is has a client (your or another), that it is selling something, that part of what it is being sold is a belief. Propaganda is the opposite of detachment in that you use your bullshit detector to pick out the nuts, but there is a detachment from the flow of automatic engagement because you know enough not to eat the nuts, or to eat them depending on the bull and how hungry you are.
No comments:
Post a Comment