Total Posts:10|Showing Posts:1-10
Jump to topic:

RIP Art?

DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/4/2011 11:47:32 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
I've been having this thought for a while. It seems that, at least to me, the value of art/abstract thought/the humanities has declined in society. Nowadays, it seems that things such as being an engineer, being a scientist, a mathematician, is much more viable and valued to society than, say, being a writer, actor, philosopher, or just a person who studies the humanities.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying that the more mathematic careers are bad, but it kind of worries me that it's starting to choke the life out of expression and creative thought. A prime example of this is the focus on mathematics and such in schools, while the humanities are dying.

What do you think? Do you agree? Disagree? Why?
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/4/2011 11:51:24 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
Resounding disagreement. On the contrary, something as expressive, powerful and human as "art" should not be bound to a paycheck. Where is the joy in expressing oneself if his life hangs on the balance because of it? I'd call myself a visual artist, though I plan on being a lawyer and hopefully elected official. It is rather the revival of art that it separates itself just a tad bit from the economy. The less money has to do with something, the more human-integrity does.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/4/2011 11:52:31 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/4/2011 11:51:24 AM, 000ike wrote:
Resounding disagreement. On the contrary, something as expressive, powerful and human as "art" should not be bound to a paycheck. Where is the joy in expressing oneself if his life hangs on the balance because of it? I'd call myself a visual artist, though I plan on being a lawyer and hopefully elected official. It is rather the revival of art that it separates itself just a tad bit from the economy. The less money has to do with something, the more human-integrity does.

I'm not saying that it should be "bound to a paycheck," but I truly feel that the world is shunning the idea of expression and art as a whole.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/4/2011 11:57:12 AM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/4/2011 11:52:31 AM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 9/4/2011 11:51:24 AM, 000ike wrote:
Resounding disagreement. On the contrary, something as expressive, powerful and human as "art" should not be bound to a paycheck. Where is the joy in expressing oneself if his life hangs on the balance because of it? I'd call myself a visual artist, though I plan on being a lawyer and hopefully elected official. It is rather the revival of art that it separates itself just a tad bit from the economy. The less money has to do with something, the more human-integrity does.

I'm not saying that it should be "bound to a paycheck," but I truly feel that the world is shunning the idea of expression and art as a whole.

Do you mean art the career or art the hobby? Two wildly different arts. In one, I see what you're saying and I don't think its a big deal, in the other I see the opposite of what you're saying.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
DetectableNinja
Posts: 6,043
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/4/2011 12:04:14 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/4/2011 11:57:12 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/4/2011 11:52:31 AM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 9/4/2011 11:51:24 AM, 000ike wrote:
Resounding disagreement. On the contrary, something as expressive, powerful and human as "art" should not be bound to a paycheck. Where is the joy in expressing oneself if his life hangs on the balance because of it? I'd call myself a visual artist, though I plan on being a lawyer and hopefully elected official. It is rather the revival of art that it separates itself just a tad bit from the economy. The less money has to do with something, the more human-integrity does.

I'm not saying that it should be "bound to a paycheck," but I truly feel that the world is shunning the idea of expression and art as a whole.

Do you mean art the career or art the hobby? Two wildly different arts. In one, I see what you're saying and I don't think its a big deal, in the other I see the opposite of what you're saying.

Actually, both. It seems that schools, on the whole, (this went in Art because it deals with art, by the by) especially in Asian countries, are pushing students away from the ideas of self-expression, and restricting them to having generally ONE answer. This is most likely due to the growing popularity of the sciences which, though beneficial, aren't leaving much room for people to have art as a career.

It's extraordinarily difficult to stay above the poverty line as a philosopher, actor, writer or singer nowadays. Of course, I'm not implying that artists are in it for the money, but it seems to be becoming an unrespected field.
Think'st thou heaven is such a glorious thing?
I tell thee, 'tis not half so fair as thou
Or any man that breathes on earth.

- Christopher Marlowe, Doctor Faustus
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/4/2011 12:11:13 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/4/2011 12:04:14 PM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 9/4/2011 11:57:12 AM, 000ike wrote:
At 9/4/2011 11:52:31 AM, DetectableNinja wrote:
At 9/4/2011 11:51:24 AM, 000ike wrote:
Resounding disagreement. On the contrary, something as expressive, powerful and human as "art" should not be bound to a paycheck. Where is the joy in expressing oneself if his life hangs on the balance because of it? I'd call myself a visual artist, though I plan on being a lawyer and hopefully elected official. It is rather the revival of art that it separates itself just a tad bit from the economy. The less money has to do with something, the more human-integrity does.

I'm not saying that it should be "bound to a paycheck," but I truly feel that the world is shunning the idea of expression and art as a whole.

Do you mean art the career or art the hobby? Two wildly different arts. In one, I see what you're saying and I don't think its a big deal, in the other I see the opposite of what you're saying.

Actually, both. It seems that schools, on the whole, (this went in Art because it deals with art, by the by) especially in Asian countries, are pushing students away from the ideas of self-expression, and restricting them to having generally ONE answer. This is most likely due to the growing popularity of the sciences which, though beneficial, aren't leaving much room for people to have art as a career.

It's extraordinarily difficult to stay above the poverty line as a philosopher, actor, writer or singer nowadays. Of course, I'm not implying that artists are in it for the money, but it seems to be becoming an unrespected field.

Maybe this view is based on what you've seen, but from what I've seen, new artists are being created in the hundreds of thousands every year. "Every Child is an artist. The problem is how to remain an artist once we grow up." Even many adults are artists. The only death in art is the financial part, the money-bound industry which is responsible for creating the "starving artist" image for every art career.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/4/2011 12:16:00 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
Oh and one more thing. I took art last year and it sucked. You draw something, you like it, but then the teachers tells you to change it. Same thing with the art industry. Unless one is a freelance artist, his work will always be subject to some morons whims. All the more reason for art in economy to disappear a little, and come back in the form of hobby.
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
CosmicAlfonzo
Posts: 5,955
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/4/2011 12:18:50 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
If you are to be involved in the arts, you also have to be involved in business.

The actual art is only half of the picture.

The thing is, running a business is the hard part. That is why the more successful artists end up employing managers and other people to take care of the business aspect.
Official "High Priest of Secular Affairs and Transient Distributor of Sonic Apple Seeds relating to the Reptilian Division of Paperwork Immoliation" of The FREEDO Bureaucracy, a DDO branch of the Erisian Front, a subdivision of the Discordian Back, a Limb of the Illuminatian Cosmic Utensil Corp
000ike
Posts: 11,196
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/4/2011 12:21:50 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
On a side note, this is a great website, if you draw online. http://www.ratemydrawings.com...
"A stupid despot may constrain his slaves with iron chains; but a true politician binds them even more strongly with the chain of their own ideas" - Michel Foucault
Playitagainsam
Posts: 25
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
9/5/2011 2:04:22 PM
Posted: 5 years ago
At 9/4/2011 12:16:00 PM, 000ike wrote:
Oh and one more thing. I took art last year and it sucked. You draw something, you like it, but then the teachers tells you to change it. Same thing with the art industry. Unless one is a freelance artist, his work will always be subject to some morons whims. All the more reason for art in economy to disappear a little, and come back in the form of hobby.
I agree with you to a great extent - except for the term "hobby", which I consider a term of denigration. There are many negative implications, unfortunately, attached to the term "hobby". The term implies "amateur", a lack of seriousness (or passion, if you will), attached to the work one creates; an implication of "failure", particularly in a financial sense. Would one call Van Gogh a "hobby" artist? Financially, he was a complete failure as an artist. However, we know that it was his absolute passion in life - his reason for being! I personally reserve the term "hobby" for those who dabble in something, and am highly offended when the term is applied to those who are serious about their work, even though they may be financially unrewarded for it. Oh, and as far as Van Gogh, there are many financially successful artists who, in my opinion, whose art does not compare to Van Gogh's.
All this being said, I do agree that the approach to "teaching" art in schools has been, in many cases, faulty in my opinion. The teacher who insists that a child "color within the lines", or who chastises a child for coloring a tree purple. There needs to be more emphasis on fostering imagination, and less on perfecting "how something actually looks" or "drawing what's in front of you". Art should be an area in which, (although we can teach techniques) we should allow free imagination to flow without imposing our views and perceptions on the student.