[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [microsound] Serious Artist?



one aspect of the definition "serious" is the meaning of "unplayful: completely lacking in playfulness"

any artist who is unable to be playful is unable to create

so in that respect there are no serious artists
----- Original Message ----- From: "aleks vasic" <bvasic@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: "microsound" <microsound@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, September 14, 2006 3:36 PM
Subject: Re: [microsound] Serious Artist?



Which of the following could be considered serious artists?

Phillip Glass, Hayden, Stockhausen  or C and C Music Factory, Paris
Hilton, Ricky Martin?

I do not find it a useless term what soever.  To me a serious artist
means just that, someone who is serious.  Sorry no implied implications
there.  Just a literal description of some one who is very serious
about their work, passion what ever it is that they do.  Should we be
like the uber PC crowd and come up with another term because "serious
artist"  can be misconstrued in so many different ways.  So many
different points of reference?  To me it is not a judge-mental term
imposing my opinions upon the label/moniker.

I think there is a huge difference in regards to what motivates Paris
Hilton, and what motivates someone like Pablo Picasso, or better yet my
dad for example, an average Joe who learned the trade of furniture
making more then 50+ years ago.  Who takes pride in every facet of what
he does, strives to learn something new every day.  Refines a process
or invents a new one always driven by the passion he has for what he
does.  Why does someone like this never stop working?  Why would
someone like this use their spare time to do the same thing they do at
work every day?

What about Frank Loyd Wright, who spent a lifetime exploring the
possibilities of the aesthetic of design and architecture, why do
people like this achieve so much? because they are not serious? What
about the shmo at a local architecture firm who never considers his
profession out side of work, and cranks out the same uninspired drivel
his whole life because it is only a job to him.  A means to an end.
Someone who just does not have the fortitude to apply himself, to
learn, to enrich. Should these two individuals be considered equal as
artist's?  Is it pompous to label them?  How does one differentiate
between the two in regards to substance?

Maybe i romanticize what an artist is or what it should be.  I do know
that the creative people i have known, who are passionate, driven,
"Serious" about what they do, always move forward and better
themselves.  A lot of people on this list have been doing what they do
for many years because of how they feel about their "art".  A label is
only as valid as the definition placed upon it, again i guess its a
point of reference thing.

Is art dead?  Has it always been dead?  I see individuals on this list
label what is art and what is not art.  Your opinion differs from mine?
 Well too bad your wrong, im right.  Is a commercial Designer always a
hipster?  No respect for problem solving?  Intelligent design?  Ugh
just an example.  I know that i am guilty of this to some extent as
well, and it is almost impossible not to do so when you are discussing
art and its endless philosophical facets, i just find it very
disappointing when i hear fellow artist's. or anyone for the matter
take such a hard line in regards to anything creative.

In the end though i think the conversations/exchange of ideas that go
down on this list are of a very positive nature.  Its when people get
angry or intense on this list that things truly interesting.

I guess i should get back to work eh?

Cheers

aLEKs



On Sep 14, 2006, at 9:25 AM, steinbrüchel wrote:

Am 14.9.2006 15:00 Uhr schrieb "peter lasell" unter <p_lasell@xxxxxxxxx>:

"Serious Artist" tends to mean that others take the artists work seriously.

i disagree, as i don't think this has anything to do about the other peoples
opinion... if nobody likes my "art" i still can be very serious about it.
being serious, determined and sincere about one's own work is very personnel
and doesn't have anything to do with anybodys opinion. of course if
everybody likes my "art" then i'm a successfull artist, but that doesn't
necessarily make me more serious...


The term doesn't necessarily describe the quality of an artists work. I don't
think money has to figure into the definition of the term.

with this i very much agree :)

Peter
www.peterlasell.net

by the way, i don't want to sound ridicilous again (cheers to graham), but me personnel thinks that the term "serious artist" is totally useless and (you've guessed it) NOT RELEVANT :)

have a nice day,
ralph.

---------------------------------
Get your email and more, right on the  new Yahoo.com

-- http://www.synchron.ch .:.::.:.



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
website: http://www.microsound.org



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
website: http://www.microsound.org





---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: microsound-unsubscribe@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
For additional commands, e-mail: microsound-help@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
website: http://www.microsound.org