Art is a footnote to reality

[Jackinmyhat]

Why do artists tend towards mental illness and drug abuse? Because they sense that what they do is of secondary importance. They are by and large watchers, not doers. They are the adjectives to the nouns that are others' lives. They are inferiority and mediocrity personified.

As for 'art for its own sake'- that's a pile of BS. I might as well point to my fingernail and claim "It is what it is!"...Nothing worthy is derived from itself; it must be derivative of something completely within the realm of objective reality.

Real life and those who live it is the carriage rolling by...Art is the sound of the carriage, heard through the ears of the passive, fearful, life-hating artist.

Just thought I'd let all you artists know that you're wasting your time (and the time of your audience).

[Silverfuck]

Some people (Oscar Wilde, for example) would tell you that Art is superior to Reality, that reality exists only in our perception of it and art shapes that perception and allows us to see beauty where beauty did not exist before.

Whether you believe that or not, art colours the existence of those who create and enjoy it. If you don't appreciate it...well I can't fault you for that, but anything that can stir a person as deeply as art can is not without meaning, whether its meaning can be quantified or not.

[Agent 008]

Art IS superior to reality. In fact, art creates new realities. That's why to me, a good computer game is probably the greatest form of art, on par with literature. Then comes music; and most paintings/sculptures don't really do it for me - very few paintings have managed to really grip me and leave an impact.

There is not much to vanilla real life, if you think about it; some artists probably come to realise that fact, which leads to drug abuse, mental illnesses and to creating more art, trying to escape reality.

[Euda]

I might as well point to my fingernail

Though fingernail art isn't to my tastes, it can get rather intricate.

http://www.doadangle.com/photogallery/100_1261.jpg http://img.slate.com/media/1/123125/122985/2153594/2153595/4_02_PaintedNailsTN.jpg http://www.ginawallace.com/images/gina_wallace_snow_white_nails_lg.jpg http://www.northcampvillage.co.uk/images/nail_art.jpg

Art communicates through every medium. It's a part of life.

[Jackinmyhat]

Some people (Oscar Wilde, for example) would tell you that Art is superior to Reality, that reality exists only in our perception of it and art shapes that perception and allows us to see beauty where beauty did not exist before.

Note my second paragraph- all art is derivative. That is a fact. Just as all our senses are derivative of reality. If it were otherwise, then we would be disconnected from reality, and hence unable to survive.

Whether you believe that or not, art colours the existence of those who create and enjoy it. If you don't appreciate it...well I can't fault you for that, but anything that can stir a person as deeply as art can is not without meaning, whether its meaning can be quantified or not.

I'd argue that the thing doing the stirring isn't the art but that from which the art derives, accentuates, embellishes. What you're appreciating isn't the art but the unfiltered real experience.

Art IS superior to reality. In fact, art creates new realities. That's why to me, a good computer game is probably the greatest form of art, on par with literature. Then comes music; and most paintings/sculptures don't really do it for me - very few paintings have managed to really grip me and leave an impact.

There is not much to vanilla real life, if you think about it; some artists probably come to realise that fact, which leads to drug abuse, mental illnesses and to creating more art, trying to escape reality.

You can't prove that any art isn't derivative, just as Hume couldn't prove that any subjective experience wasn't derivative of sensory perception. You can have a more profound experience from an artists' condensation of his/her experience, but all that is the sensationalist manufacturing- you're experiencing the artist as art, nothing more.

[whimsi]

Being a derivative does not mean something is unoriginal.

The combination of a thousand experiences and knowledge and observation into one unified piece that even just one person can relate to is a very awesome feeling and often results in an original piece with details and concepts from elsewhere.

I am sorry you can't appreciate the joy that art brings to many people. I can only hope, for your sake, that you find equal amounts of joy in something else in your life.

Oh yeah -- Edit: I think the reason that it seems like many great artists are drug users is because people appreciate art with two qualities quite often:
1) "Wow, that's so awesome. I can relate to it or get some sort of joy out of viewing it"
2) "Wow, I've never looked at life like that, or a specific part of life the piece may pertain to. This is where the drugs/insanity etc come into play. Of course no one looked at <whatever> like that if the person is mentally unstable or on drugs :)

[Atlas]

Why do artists tend towards mental illness and drug abuse? Because they sense that what they do is of secondary importance. They are by and large watchers, not doers. They are the adjectives to the nouns that are others' lives. They are inferiority and mediocrity personified.

Secondary importance? Watchers? Give me a fucking break. "They" can influence by their message. Ever seen a fucking propaganda poster? Ever seen a monument? A monument is a work of art that has a message directed at the people that are going to see it. Google "Triumphal arch". Ever seen a punk band on stage? have you noticed that the crowd tends to do what the motherfucker with the microphone (the "artist") tells them to?

Real life and those who live it is the carriage rolling by...Art is the sound of the carriage, heard through the ears of the passive, fearful, life-hating artist.

shitty analogy you got there pal. The artist can't be passive. I don't know if you've noticed, but the artist always tends to emit a message, through his art. Whether it's "hey, i got mad skillz and i can draw your naked sister perfectly" or "the essence of life can be likened to the journey of this little raindrop from the sky to the ground", the artist strives to tell the audience something.

Just thought I'd let all u artists know that u're wasting ur time (and the time of ur audience).

we're not wasting our time, asshat. We have a lot of fun shitting out artwork. And the audience is not forced to watch or listen to anything, if they're wasting their time it's by their own choice.

[whimsi]

Secondary importance? ...And the audience is not forced to watch or listen to anything, if they're wasting their time it's by their own choice.

Well done, chap.

[Afromonk]

I believe firmly the art is on par with reality.
My art reflects life in someone elses eyes.
A mind without consequence, viewing what is and isn't there.

I do art for enjoyment, for relaxation and more importantly for a qualification :D

[Miaow]

Why do artists tend towards mental illness and drug abuse? Because they sense that what they do is of secondary importance. They are by and large watchers, not doers. They are the adjectives to the nouns that are others' lives. They are inferiority and mediocrity personified.

As for 'art for its own sake'- that's a pile of BS. I might as well point to my fingernail and claim "It is what it is!"...Nothing worthy is derived from itself; it must be derivative of something completely within the realm of objective reality.

Real life and those who live it is the carriage rolling by...Art is the sound of the carriage, heard through the ears of the passive, fearful, life-hating artist.

Just thought I'd let all you artists know that you're wasting your time (and the time of your audience).

Well, that's just like, your opinion, man.
http://a0.vox.com/6a00c2251d2769549d0109810ca2e0000c-320pi

[Jackinmyhat]

Some people (Oscar Wilde, for example) would tell you that Art is superior to Reality, that reality exists only in our perception of it and art shapes that perception and allows us to see beauty where beauty did not exist before.

This was the most intelligent reply, but Keats and Wilde were wrong- beauty does not equal truth. Our perceptions are determined by our evolutionary/ physiological ancestry, not truth. Truth is what guides that ancestry, but nobody actually witnesses it as it unfolds- all we see is a matrix of social, cultural and political nonsense.

Whether you believe that or not, art colours the existence of those who create and enjoy it. If you don't appreciate it...well I can't fault you for that, but anything that can stir a person as deeply as art can is not without meaning, whether its meaning can be quantified or not.

I'm not trying to quantify art's meaning; I'm just saying it's basically meaningless. It's ability to inspire sentimental feelings doesn't make it meaningful or connect it to objective reality in some fundamental way. It only 'means' that it is yet another disconnected, egotistical strand of human experience.

Art IS superior to reality. In fact, art creates new realities. That's why to me, a good computer game is probably the greatest form of art, on par with literature. Then comes music; and most paintings/sculptures don't really do it for me - very few paintings have managed to really grip me and leave an impact.

There is not much to vanilla real life, if you think about it; some artists probably come to realise that fact, which leads to drug abuse, mental illnesses and to creating more art, trying to escape reality.

I think you both agree- art represents the destructive human taint and pholly upon pristine nature- humanity's pathetic, futile attempt to reinvent nature's beauty...

I am sorry you can't appreciate the joy that art brings to many people. I can only hope, for your sake, that you find equal amounts of joy in something else in your life.

I get plenty joy from art. I could start a thread on Kandinsky that would do circles over your head. Art gives me great joy. That doesn't mean it's not a bunch of nonsense.

Being a derivative does not mean something is unoriginal.

The combination of a thousand experiences and knowledge and observation into one unified piece that even just one person can relate to is a very awesome feeling and often results in an original piece with details and concepts from elsewhere.

You contradicted yourself,

"Wow, I've never looked at life like that, or a specific part of life the piece may pertain to. This is where the drugs/insanity etc come into play. Of course no one looked at <whatever> like that if the person is mentally unstable or on drugs"

That's the drugs talking, not the original POV.

Secondary importance? Watchers? Give me a fucking break. "They" can influence by their message. Ever seen a fucking propaganda poster? Ever seen a monument? A monument is a work of art that has a message directed at the people that are going to see it. Google "Triumphal arch". Ever seen a punk band on stage? have you noticed that the crowd tends to do what the motherfucker with the microphone (the "artist") tells them to?

True, but the message doesn't derive from the messenger; it derives from the people. The punk rocker's rantings have no meaning beyond pure sensationalism. It is all image, reflection, mimesis.

Real life and those who live it is the carriage rolling by...Art is the sound of the carriage, heard through the ears of the passive, fearful, life-hating artist.

shitty analogy you got there pal. The artist can't be passive. I don't know if you've noticed, but the artist always tends to emit a message, through his art. Whether it's "hey, i got mad skillz and i can draw your naked sister perfectly" or "the essence of life can be likened to the journey of this little raindrop from the sky to the ground", the artist strives to tell the audience something.

A message, yes, but a message that is ultimately non-relative and ultimately inconsequential to the thing being represented.

we're not wasting our time, asshat. We have a lot of fun shitting out artwork. And the audience is not forced to watch or listen to anything, if they're wasting their time it's by their own choice.

No, you really are wasting your time, and I'm not convinced you enjoy your diarheea. The audience isn't forced to watch or listen to you, but you are demanding that they spend some time and effort giving you the benefit of the doubt, which, given your meager offering, isn't fair.

I was lousy in school. Real screwed-up. A moron. I was antisocial and didn't bother with the other kids. A really bad student. I didn't have any brains. I didn't know what I was doing there. That's why I became an actor.

To hell with this stupid show business, this ridiculous showbiz, this futile waste of life. I look back and see a desert wasteland. All those years spent in a fake environment. Everything was a fake.

My art reflects life in someone elses eyes.

Ummm...no, it doesn't.

A mind without consequence,

No...

viewing what is and isn't there.

And no...

That's three strikes, buddy.

[Afromonk]

How can you based your own judgement on my opinions.
Either you're a 13 year old boy or just a really big fag.

[Atlas]

True, but the message doesn't derive from the messenger; it derives from the people. The punk rocker's rantings have no meaning beyond pure sensationalism. It is all image, reflection, mimesis.

the people can't get the idea of the message without the messenger. If the messenger is a work of art rather than speech or signs, it doesn't make it any less important.


A message, yes, but a message that is ultimately non-relative and ultimately inconsequential to the thing being represented.

inconsequential to the thing represented, yes. Just like talking about about that thing.

No, you really are wasting your time, and I'm not convinced you enjoy your diarheea. The audience isn't forced to watch or listen to you, but you are demanding that they spend some time and effort giving you the benefit of the doubt, which, given your meager offering, isn't fair.

we aren't demanding shit. The only thing the audience could offer, and that's if they WANT to, is attention. If they don't offer attention, they won't "get" what the piece of "artwork" is about. We serve our product and they can do whatever the fuck they want to do, but if they want to understand it, they have to focus their attention on it, and they do that by their own choice.

[skinny love]

if enjoying music is wasting time, then i have no problem with wasting all of mine. music is superior to reality. it's one of the heavenly things on this planet and i refuse to ignore its beauty.

[Jackinmyhat]

If you have no problem with wasting all of the time of your life, then who am I to argue. I will say however that that is time that you won't be getting back anytime soon...To each their own; I'd rather do something substantial with my life.

[Obbe]

I'd rather do something substantial with my life.

Like propagating your insignificant opinion?

Life and nature are just as meaningless and purposeless as art is.

[Afromonk]

If you have no problem with wasting all of the time of your life, then who am I to argue. I will say however that that is time that you won't be getting back anytime soon...To each their own; I'd rather do something substantial with my life.

Like wanking while crying?
Because of how uncreative and unsatisfied your life is?

[uhhyehhssx]

i think it has to be understood everyone is different and everyone has their own version of what reality is.
an artist/creative person obviously thinks completely differently to someone who isn't creative for example, someone who works with numbers or a set routine or whatever everyday.
a creative person sees things differently and reacts to things differently.
art is a reflection of reality of sorts. the reality the artist has.
if something is just "made up" it has to have come from somewhere, someone's imagination, which relates to your memory or subconscious or even conscious mind, which relates to things they've experienced in life, which is their reality.

i could be wrong, but that's how i see it. the reason people have different ideas and thoughts and create different things is because they've had different experiences to the next person who will create a wholly different something all together.

[Virus]

Some people (Oscar Wilde, for example) would tell you that Art is superior to Reality, that reality exists only in our perception of it and art shapes that perception and allows us to see beauty where beauty did not exist before.

Whether you believe that or not, art colours the existence of those who create and enjoy it. If you don't appreciate it...well I can't fault you for that, but anything that can stir a person as deeply as art can is not without meaning, whether its meaning can be quantified or not.

You could also argue and say that art isn't reality until someone makes it real. Look at engineering. 9/10 times it starts as an idea in someone's head, a pencil drawing, then lots of math, autoCAD, sweat, blood, and tears later, you have something new. Life without art is bland, but an art on it's own is also bland.

[kite--]

If you have no problem with wasting all of the time of your life, then who am I to argue. I will say however that that is time that you won't be getting back anytime soon...To each their own; I'd rather do something substantial with my life.

Art is alternate form of communication. It provokes an emotional response in others.

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/davepalmer/cutandpaste/images/dada/heartfield/heartfield6.jpg

Can you tell me that John Heartfields 'Adolf the Superman' was a pointless waste of time?

[Atlas]

http://homepage.ntlworld.com/davepalmer/cutandpaste/images/dada/heartfield/heartfield6.jpg

Can you tell me that John Heartfields 'Adolf the Superman' was a pointless waste of time?

i don't know about him, but i can. That image contains 3 cliches, which is 3 too many.

1 - Adolf Hitler
2 - coins/money
3 - swastika

if i had a penny for every time some cocksucker used the image of Hitler for his artwork i'd have enough to buy a pack of drawing charcoal.

[Miaow]

Anyway... This thread is titled after the type of thing you would write an art dissertation on, not a solid statement. Art can be a representation of reality, but for example, expressionism was based on the idea of twistingand distorting the perception of reality to further represent something that is beyond that which is seen. 'Art' as a word refers to too many seperate subjects to solely condole one such bold statement, of which is vague anyway.
In the instance of the art of architecture, the like of the Bauhaus school promoted the idea of fitting the needs of society before the formal representation, yet the design aspect of such architecture is still well made. Art can only be seen as 'subjective' if when you look at a well designed building such as this and all you see is metal, glass and concrete.
As for the whole aspect of artists leaning towards drugs/mental illness, shut the fuck up. Basing your perceptions and opinions on the artist rather than the art is close minded and retarded. You are basing your opinion of art on the idea of 'artist' being a personality title, not a word to describe someone by what they create.

You need to stop being such a pussy, redwings.

[kite--]

i don't know about him, but i can. That image contains 3 cliches, which is 3 too many.

1 - Adolf Hitler
2 - coins/money
3 - swastika

if i had a penny for every time some cocksucker used the image of Hitler for his artwork i'd have enough to buy a pack of drawing charcoal.

Wow you really have NO idea.

That image is dated July 1932. It was used as an anti-hitler poster for the 1932 election. So that makes 'not typical' at all!
Adolf the superman, swallows gold and spouts junk. The title pretty much says it for you.


So before you try and convince people to your way of thinking, how about doing some research.

[Atlas]

So before you try and convince people to your way of thinking, how about doing some research.

i wasn't trying to convince anyone of anything.

i was just saying it's a piece of shit. My personal opinion.

[Miaow]

"Art is an illusion, it is not like the real world and it should be a form of escape" -Damien Hirst

ZING

[Atlas]

Damien Hirst

fucking hate that guy. Personally.

[nshanin]

What is the point of this thread. I submit that there is none. Thus it is art; a piece in which I am a minor contributor, a stage upon which I play a supporting role.

[Miaow]

fucking hate that guy. Personally.

He hates you. So do I.

[Flex Rigid]

i wasn't trying to convince anyone of anything.

i was just saying it's a piece of shit. My personal opinion.

And so the OP prevents any further discussion of the point.