shadowplay Posted December 4, 2009 Posted December 4, 2009 Common sense will catch up to people who aren't realistic about their talents. But the "starving artist" is no different than the "starving intellectual". If you're no good at it, you'll just starve. You also may starve if you are good at it. Maybe I'm jumping to conclusions, but I feel like your post is passively aggressively directed at me. Given that you haven't seen my work, I think it's presumptuous to assume I don't have talent.
burning 4 revenge Posted December 4, 2009 Posted December 4, 2009 You also may starve if you are good at it. Maybe I'm jumping to conclusions, but I feel like your post is passively aggressively directed at me. Given that you haven't seen my work, I think it's presumptuous to assume I don't have talent. A lot of business people who got their MBA's in the 80's are on welfare now due to the crash last year People just like mocking at what they dont understand
shadowplay Posted December 4, 2009 Posted December 4, 2009 Well that's why I made reference to making a living and also, supply and demand. No matter how open you are to aesthetic differences, some "art" really is crap. You must admit this. The majority of people who get into a good art school have a fair amount of talent and don't make crap. I'm often impressed with what my classmates produce. Yes, some stand out more than others, but success in the art world has a lot to do with connections and other variables.
Author Johnny M Posted December 4, 2009 Author Posted December 4, 2009 Common sense will catch up to people who aren't realistic about their talents. But the "starving artist" is no different than the "starving intellectual". If you're no good at it, you'll just starve. I see where you're getting at, but to be clear, I wasn't talking about "intellectuals". Intellectuals are a totally different breed of people and it would be an insult to any scientist or mathematician to brand him as such.
threebyfate Posted December 4, 2009 Posted December 4, 2009 You also may starve if you are good at it. Maybe I'm jumping to conclusions, but I feel like your post is passively aggressively directed at me. Given that you haven't seen my work, I think it's presumptuous to assume I don't have talent.You are jumping to conclusions again. Stop internalizing everything I say. If I didn't like you, I wouldn't be interacting with you. If you notice, I tend to ignore people I can't stand.
shadowplay Posted December 4, 2009 Posted December 4, 2009 You are jumping to conclusions again. Stop internalizing everything I say. If I didn't like you, I wouldn't be interacting with you. If you notice, I tend to ignore people I can't stand. Well, I did have that as a qualifier. I just think your perspective might be different if you stepped into a school like RISD and walked down the halls. There are tons of people with talent. If you compare their work to what you see in galleries, it's not much different.
burning 4 revenge Posted December 4, 2009 Posted December 4, 2009 Uh oh I think Im getting in the middle of a catfight
Author Johnny M Posted December 4, 2009 Author Posted December 4, 2009 You sound like an ancient Roman decrying the new feminine wave of men embodied best by the Emperor Nero This kind of debate has raged forever Oh I am not suggesting that this is new phenomenon. History repeats itself. You make an interesting point though. In Rome, the feminine men prevailed, which lead to the eventual decline and collapse of the Roman society, the conquest of the empire by he barbarian tribes and the onset of the Dark Ages. Is this our future?
burning 4 revenge Posted December 4, 2009 Posted December 4, 2009 Oh I am not suggesting that this is new phenomenon. History repeats itself. You make an interesting point though. In Rome, the feminine men prevailed, which lead to the eventual decline and collapse of the Roman society, the conquest of the empire by he barbarian tribes and the onset of the Dark Ages. Is this our future? Well there was a lot of history to transpire between the time of Nero and the fall of the empire But you are right. By the time of the fall of the empire Roman society had grown soft and relied on outsiders for its defense, for its crops, for its manual labor....in other words for all of the rigorous tasks that are difficult and boring So you raise a good point
b52s Posted December 4, 2009 Posted December 4, 2009 This is not strictly a dating-related post, but it was inspired by some of the things said about the so-called artistic types in the now-closed 'sexy men' thread (to be clear, my comments apply to 'artistic women' as well). Basically, I just don't get this whole modern 'artistic' movement. In the past, to be considered an artist, one had to possess some semblance of talent. Nowadays, it seems that even a totally average person fancies himself an artist (or is it artiste?). I mean, it's like being an artist (or, more accurately, pretending to be an artist) has become some kind of a lifestyle for a significant portion of the young adult population. Let's start with the obvious: 'bohemian' appearance. Apparently, someone decided that the androgynous/pseudo-homosexual look is the pinnacle of artistic self-expression. Also, the whole garage band thing. It seems that just about everyone is in a band these days. It doesn't matter that your band sucks harder than Ted Haggard - the very fact that you are in one means that you're an 'artistic soul'. And then we have the whole 'I am too good to live in the real world' phenomenon. Go to any college and see who's studying math, sciences, engineering, accounting and other subjects that usually lead to successful careers. Chances are, you'd be hard pressed to see a white face in one of those classes. 90% of the class would be comprised of Asians and other immigrants. It seems that North Americans don't see these professions as 'artistic' enough - instead, they study things like sociology, women's issues, urban studies, interior design, 'therapeutic recreation' (don't ask me what that means, but I actually know someone who's getting a degree in that), and other subjects that at best can land you a job as a Starbucks 'barista' or a waiter at Denny's upon graduation. I look at all these 'artistic' types living in ratty apartments and working crappy jobs, feeling angry at the world that doesn't recognize their 'true talents' and I feel nothing but contempt. Oh yeah, and thanks for reading my rant. I met this one girl, in her friggin 30's and wants to be a Psychic. lol
threebyfate Posted December 4, 2009 Posted December 4, 2009 Well, I did have that as a qualifier. I just think your perspective might be different if you stepped into a school like RISD and walked down the halls. There are tons of people with talent. If you compare their work to what you see in galleries, it's not much different.Hey, don't get me wrong. I have a lot of respect for artists. Just not for the unrealistic ones, who don't have what it takes to make it. Whether you know it or not, I draw and paint, even had one piece put up on a friend's wall. But I don't have what it takes to be a real artist. Just someone with a creative hobby. Architecture was my first love. But I also realized I didn't have the talent to be an excellent Architect. So, instead, I found something else, which suited my talents better.
kizik Posted December 4, 2009 Posted December 4, 2009 Nothing wrong with artistic passion That said, don't quit your day job
shadowplay Posted December 4, 2009 Posted December 4, 2009 Hey, don't get me wrong. I have a lot of respect for artists. Just not for the unrealistic ones, who don't have what it takes to make it. Whether you know it or not, I draw and paint, even had one piece put up on a friend's wall. But I don't have what it takes to be a real artist. Just someone with a creative hobby. Architecture was my first love. But I also realized I didn't have the talent to be an excellent Architect. So, instead, I found something else, which suited my talents better. Yeah, I enjoy drawing and painting too but I'm nothing amazing at it. Video is the only thing I'm really passionate about and seems to suit my combination of talents. I don't think I'm being unrealistic, given that I've developed a number of skills in practical video related professions, but it's hard to be objective about yourself.
The Way I Am Posted December 4, 2009 Posted December 4, 2009 Go to any college and see who's studying math, sciences, engineering, accounting and other subjects that usually lead to successful careers. Chances are, you'd be hard pressed to see a white face in one of those classes. 90% of the class would be comprised of Asians and other immigrants. Don't know where you're looking, but my engineering classes had plenty of white faces. That was a little over 5 years ago, and I don't think things have changed that much since then. Do you have some actual data to support your claim?
threebyfate Posted December 4, 2009 Posted December 4, 2009 Yeah, I enjoy drawing and painting too but I'm nothing amazing at it. Video is the only thing I'm really passionate about and seems to suit my combination of talents. I don't think I'm being unrealistic, given that I've developed a number of skills in practical video related professions, but it's hard to be objective about yourself.The best way to gauge realism or unrealism, as you're well aware, is to have a number of professionals critique your work. I don't have enough knowledge on this, to make any judgement call on your work, since it's not my expertise. I do know what I personally like but that's pretty meaningless personal preference.
shadowplay Posted December 4, 2009 Posted December 4, 2009 The best way to gauge realism or unrealism, as you're well aware, is to have a number of professionals critique your work. I don't have enough knowledge on this, to make any judgement call on your work, since it's not my expertise. I do know what I personally like but that's pretty meaningless personal preference. Yeah, my instructors like my stuff but I don't hold their opinion in very high regard because they're not incredibly successful...or they wouldn't be teaching.
threebyfate Posted December 4, 2009 Posted December 4, 2009 Yeah, my instructors like my stuff but I don't hold their opinion in very high regard because they're not incredibly successful...or they wouldn't be teaching. Now that cracked me up. S'truth!
burning 4 revenge Posted December 4, 2009 Posted December 4, 2009 Yeah, I enjoy drawing and painting too but I'm nothing amazing at it. Video is the only thing I'm really passionate about and seems to suit my combination of talents. I don't think I'm being unrealistic, given that I've developed a number of skills in practical video related professions, but it's hard to be objective about yourself. Have you considered becoming a hairdresser
shadowplay Posted December 4, 2009 Posted December 4, 2009 Have you considered becoming a hairdresser Lol. I hate hair.
melodymatters Posted December 4, 2009 Posted December 4, 2009 (edited) As somone who was in the entertainment biz, I think there's one fail safe measure of whether one is a musician, artist, actor etc : DO you make your primary living through your art ? My theater companies were how I supported my child and paid my mortgage, so yeah, I was a theater producer. When I started making more money as a Realtor, thats how I defined myself. If my next job is say, selling furniture and I make more money from that than my existing theatre, I will consider myself a furniture salesperson. And oh yeah, I always considered myself an " entertainer" not an "artist" Edited December 4, 2009 by melodymatters add on
burning 4 revenge Posted December 4, 2009 Posted December 4, 2009 Entertainment and art can be two different things though A topless dancer is an entertainer but very few of them are artists. Id say most of the musicians Ive known end up thinking more as entertainers because they like to get positive feedback from a live audience, but the more artistic ones were more concerned with crafting music and recording it
sumdude Posted December 4, 2009 Posted December 4, 2009 As somone who was in the entertainment biz, I think there's one fail safe measure of whether one is a musician, artist, actor etc : DO you make your primary living through your art ? Only if you define art as money or a career. So I guess you can only be an athlete if you're on a professional team? Sorry but that seems a bit shallow. But then again Hunter S. Thomson did describe the music business as "A shallow money pit" Which is why it's called the music business not the art of music itself.
melodymatters Posted December 4, 2009 Posted December 4, 2009 Well, I just knew a lot of " actors" and "musicians" who A) made their living installing cable, they were weekend hero's.Nothing wrong with a hobby, thats wonderful, but at the end of the day, you are cable guy who plays guitar, not the other way around And B) I don't know, I just found it pretentious to call oneself an " artist" unless perhaps one was a painter who made a living that way. I felt more ...vaudvillian (sp) in that we were only as good as our last show, we didn't receive grants, so if our shows sucked, we went broke. Only in the last 50 or so years have entertainers become royalty. 100 yrs ago, you were considered lower class and got tomatoes thrown at you ! Seems more honest IMO !
Ody Posted December 4, 2009 Posted December 4, 2009 Most people also have a brainy side to them. Do you know anyone who solves math equations or creates chess problems for fun? If you do, chances are these people are over 70. And yes, doing things like that was not at all weird or uncommon in the past - just ask your grandparents if they are still alive. To be clear, I'm not suggesting a math nerd as some kind of an ideal towards which young people should strive for. The problem is that we, as a society, have lost all sense of balance and are putting way too much emphasis on artistic self-expression. In the past, the human ideal was to be a Renaissance Man - someone who is well versed in both arts and sciences and is athletic to boot. Nowadays, the idols that young people worship are dysfunctional 'performance artists'. So do you have any actual data to back this up, such as a list of literacy rates over time, or a comparison of higher education levels completed in the 1960's versus today? I figure someone so hardcore about chess and critical thinking might have considered that. Or is this just supposed to be intuitively obvious? Likewise with the musical talent thing. Some link to a study on the role of ghostwriting in the top 40 charts throughout the twentieth century might be helpful... Perhaps an essay on the role of electronic pitch correction in musical performance and recording during the last decade. Or should we just stick with hand waving? Why is this in the dating forum? I'm thinking rants or water cooler.
sumdude Posted December 4, 2009 Posted December 4, 2009 I'm a musician and a songwriter/composer. I also know many others as well as painters, photographers, people who write and produce film and video etc. Most of us all have 'day jobs' which have at least some aspect of art in them. Most have also been paid for their 'art' at times in their lives. Which at least implies being a professional at some level. So I'll split the difference ok? If you actually get paid with some regularity for it that helps. Let's face it, making a full time living in art is difficult. Talent isn't the deciding factor. You get no health insurance, in fact our society is geared against artists and anyone self employed. Not that it stops me from trying. If I don't write or perform after a month or so I start going a bit nuts.
Recommended Posts