What is art again?

[scribbler]

"Culture" will mislead you in regards to Art because it cannot attend to the yearnings and potencies of an individual. So, you, as the one and only perceiver who really matters, will need to continually raise your expectations and continually forbid the "business-as-usual" offerings that are being served up. All that stuff of commerce, utility, function and participation.
To get to the real Art will require painful discernings, dynamic disregardings, exhausting omissions, mind-numbing exclusions, heroic rejectings and remorseless exclusions. Hard work.
Then, you will have freed yourself to go about those glorious embracings, epiphanied encounterings, super-charging exhilerations, nourishing engorgings and impenetrable fortifications. More hard work.
So, if you make it critically important and work really hard some Art might come into you or go out of you.
But beware. Your culture will expect to convince you, during your weaker automaton'd hours, that they've made an Artful place for you. But that place wont save you.
Fact is, everything really worthy was coming anyway. A silent steamrolling Art locomotive; not to be stopped (and it wont be an easy hop).

 

[homeless mind]

People who create art to pay the rent are...icky, to me. However, selling short stories to adult magazines for the first X amount of years of your career to just get by and buy booze is just fine. Because those stories were good.

Artists who create to pay rent = icky.

Beginning adult rag writers who get by/buy booze = just fine.

Do I have that right?

 

[Bukfan]

Buk wrote short stories for the skin mags in order to pay his rent etc. I can't see anything wrong with that. He also gave readings, although he hated it, just to get the money...

 

[homeless mind]

I have no problem with that either, Bukfan. It's a fascinating part of his legacy.

"Icky," however, sounds childish and maybe even insulting relative to the millions(?) of artists worldwide who are: graphic artists, painters, sculptors, designers, illustrators, animators, etc. who toil daily and create (good and bad) work "” to pay the rent.

That's all.

Pax

 

[scribbler]

"Paying the rent", to me has everything to do with plain ol' sustenance. "Feeding the bulldog", "Paying the frieght", passing the day, fitting-in, being useful, drawing a check, back to the salt mines, punching the clock, earning your keep, 9 to 5...all the triflings, meanderings and dutiful participation that necessarily occupies the greater portion of our lives. But, If we have a developed ability that will provide a more agreeable way to subsist, then fine, do it. Or dig a ditch. doesnt matter. The Art doesnt care how you get sheltered and fueled. But the Art has no need to be included in the menial travails. It is the "special" part of your presence, the ONLY part that doesn't care about how rough your day was. So, when its time for Art, we're NOT to be thinking about the rent, or retirement, or college tuition...all the other crap will take care of THAT. The Art must be made quite apart...by its own terms...and not get contaminated by the crawling ants and the your bank-account's honey-do list. Make some stuff for money, YES,. paintings, stories, symphonies; but the real stuff will happen by another need altogether. Just know what is getting made when....dont confuse the two acts.
This is why I often prefer tearing apart a backhoe to executing commissioned sculpture. But in the end, eating is most important, so we will do whatever we must.

 

[homeless mind]

You remind me of my brother-in-law, who is a lawyer, talks in circles, and argues both sides of the point in the same conversation with equal joy and dexterity.

But, when teetering and preaching from the high ground, keep an eye on your feet.

I dig your writing; and many of your perspectives. You rock.

However, your philosophic waxing on this one is getting stuck on the proverbial candle.

I wouldn't pigeonhole all artists into the corner of your beliefs; as we all create differently; and have different motivations. Money, sex, drugs, girls, boys, boats, houses, fame, infamy, guilt, family, whatever...frankly, I don't care. Like most fields, the artworld is comprised of everything. Perhaps more, because of the creativity involved.

Speaking alone, all I care about is the final art; let me be blunt, the final product "” because, like Bukowski books and most other art, it's for sale. 10 minutes to create or 10 years, irrelevant. It's one of two things: Great. Sux. Hell, Vincent wanted to sell his art, Pollock, too.

In the real world I live in, most artists who aren't in college or younger are encumbered with responsibilities. You know.

Or they are just part-time artists or writers, with another gig paying the rent, preaching from the safety of their net, while the professional artists live and die by their sales.

To pay the rent.

Gotta go, my doberman needs feeding. ;)

Pax

 

[hoochmonkey9]

art can be created by anyone, anywhere, anytime for whatever reason. and not everyone will like it. but that doesn't matter.

trying to define art is like trying to catch fog in your hands. it seems like it should be easy, but the harder you try, the more foolish you look, taking swings at the air like some nutjob.

but, luckily, somebody somewhere will call that swinging nutjob an artist.

or something. sign this urinal and stick it on the wall, I'm done. ;)

 

[homeless mind]

nice fog simile hooch. :)

 

[Lolita Twist]

"Icky," however, sounds childish and maybe even insulting relative to the millions(?) of artists worldwide who are: graphic artists, painters, sculptors, designers, illustrators, animators, etc. who toil daily and create (good and bad) work "” to pay the rent.

With all due respect... but it seems with everything you write, you really have something up your ass.

 

[homeless mind]

You have no idea. Doctors are baffled.

Now let me be serious.

When someone insults a majority of the entire working art world "” people busting their balls trying to eek out a living (probably over 50% would be my guess) "” and don't mind working to pay their rent via art, I occasionally feel obligated to comment.

It's not "Icky." It's fucking cool. IMO.

I do have one regret in this thread, and that is that Scribbler may misinterpret what I wrote, as it is not directed at him personally, but rather at his POV. I also sent him a PM stating so; he is good wood, and a bud. This is a public apology, needed or not.

 

[scribbler]

Publicly not needed. HM. (except the comparison to the lawyer...ha, thats a first)

I think I understand the "ickiness" that Lolita refers to pretty well. And I have no problem with it at all. I dont imagine any paycheck-earning artists would be offended...and if they are, they're paying too much attention to what other people think.
Basically. if you're good at something, YES, let it serve you in any way it can. But there should probably be a hierarchy WITHIN that reserves your best, most dangerous, spectacularly intense and illuminating works for you OWN gain. It feels much different that getting a check, that gain. I have gotten plenty of checks (could always use some more) but I grow and flourish from the things that I never thought I would do...that NO ONE wanted me to do...(maybe they even begged me NOT to do it) until I did it. Everyone one else is there to impose limitations on things that arent needed. They'll use their money to that end. Just dont let them, thats all.

 

[Purple Stickpin]

People who create art to pay the rent are...icky, to me.

Take, for example, Madonna vs. a jazz musician who makes $40K a year. Plenty of people would tell you that Madonna's a great artist (music is an art, right?), but not nearly as many folks dig original jazz.

And Madonna's not just paying the rent; she could feed several third world countries for decades. But the original jazz musician is hoping to pay the rent, and probably creating something far more original than a vocal line to a computer-synthesized dance track.

So the jazz musician is icky, and Madonna isn't?

 

[Lolita Twist]

To me, Madonna is icky... but it would seem to me, the jazz musician cares more about the music than he does the rent. Pop artists, to me it would seem, care more about making money than they do their music.

IE) The Funk Brothers. Never got paid a dime. Produced some of the best music ever recorded ever, never getting credit until yonks after the fact. Ever hear'ah Motown?

 

[Purple Stickpin]

I've played and studied with dozens of jazz musicians who care very deeply about paying the rent. Jazz is just the way they do it, mainly because they do love it.

I was merely pointing out that creating art to pay the rent may not always be a despicable thing. Because these jazz musicians could become real estate agents, but instead, they make less to create art.

 

[mjp]

Any artist, musician, writer or juggler who can make a living at their art should be admired. The vast, overwhelming majority never make a dime. Most spend more money on their art than they will ever earn selling or performing it.

Art, or any other kind of creative pursuit, is a ridiculously difficult way to make a buck. I think the idea that a lot of people are saying, "Hey, I don't give a rat's ass about art, but it sure seems like a great way to pay the rent!" is uninformed. You need to talk to more people who are "paying the rent" with their art and see what's really going on.

Even artists who might appear to be "cashing in," or catering to the lowest common denominator started out doing what they are doing because they loved doing it, or were compelled to do it. Your pop singer has to have an impressive amount of drive and tenacity in order to become successful. They don't just hand that shit to disinterested, random people on the street because they look good in the suit. You saw that Brady Bunch episode, right?

I think all this hair-splitting is pointless. My hat is off to anyone in any creative field who doesn't have to work in an office. Period. I don't care what they are producing. I probably ain't buying what most of them are producing, but I would never begrudge anyone a living.

 

[Billville]

Don't know if one can define bad,

I disagree. I think one can define bad art but viewing art in regard to it's role in society, which is: the striving for resolution to the dailiness of life.

(stay with me here)

For many (some), the dailiness of life is filled with emotional complexity. They're not limited to just feeling sadness at a funeral, happiness at a wedding or joy with the arrival of a newborn baby. Even wiping their own ass conjures up feelings other than pride.

They have mixed emotions.

Who should they be able to turn to to sort out these conflicted feelings? Artists. Artists and the world of art, because, after all, ya ain't gonna talk to your buddy about your sense of loss every time you flush the toilet.

And these artists should be delivering. If they're offering nothing but one-dimensional, canned emotional responses to even the simplest of trials and tribulations, then they have failed, and that is bad. Bad art, bad artist, bad human being. It should be considered a crime. If we get conned outta fifty bucks, no biggie, we know where to go to get fifty more bucks, but, if we're conned outta resolution ... where do we turn. Everyone else has already failed us.

 

[scribbler]

You hit the nail on the head B, it is quite up to the artists to rescue the dallying sentiments and the thwartingly distracted engagings of mankind. But the trick is that it will happen by an Art that was aimed AWAY from humanity, by Art that was purposed whims and fancies and executed by the potentiated isolation of some unleashed oft-dissenter who needed-not at all to give impact to anyone.

And M is right again, if you're an artist and you've managed to construct a life that keeps you somehow satelliting your body of work then you've done well (hands clapping). Its surely handy to offshoot: perform, exhibit, lecture, renew, book-bash, instruct, interpret, affect and insinuate as much possible within your impassioned area (or areas). But man, it can tire the best of us, earning THAT buck. So we have stamp collections and wine (and often even, there are other people living in our houses).:D

 

[Billville]

I don't believe you can aim art away from humanity. In the end the oft-dessenter is always the one who has the most of it.

 

[homeless mind]

I disagree. I think one can define bad art but viewing art in regard to it's role in society, which is: the striving for resolution to the dailiness of life.

(stay with me here)...

First, you seem moderately twisted, so my interest is piqued.
Second, you have a cool handle, and that's big points with a jackass like me.

Now, let's examine your thinking. One would have to first agree with your premise: ie:art's role in society: striving for resolution in the dailiness of life.

(I'm still with you "” at the moment)

Well, the dailiness of life can be filled with emotional complexity, or emotional restraint, or even lack of all emotions "” so your verbal ship is meandering "” hard to port, hard to starboard. And I might add, I take pride in a good stool; and cleanliness is next to godliness, as the old saw goes...

Now to your discussion of mixed emotions; and those to whom one should turn?

You make a huge leap of faith here; wanting artists to sort out conflicted feelings. You are basically going to rely upon one of the most conflicted of all genres of the human species, artists, to pack that baggage on the plane of resolution? You are correct about one thing, though, no other group would probably be more open to talking about your sense of loss every time you flush your toilet, save for accountants.

To your last paragraph, I may disagree with your viewpoint of canned emotional responses. You see, I'm a big Andy Warhol fan; and well, you know his Campbell's soup art? Canned, beautiful, brilliant, ground-breaking, and copied to death. Let's just can that for the moment, as you close with something potentially a tad more important.

The discussion of bad art, bad artist, bad human being. And crime. And about getting conned outta resolution. And also about a fifty not being much to get conned outta. You see, here is where I have a problem. Because fifty is halfway to a bottle of Johhny Blue. And that, B-Ville, means something to me. I like my Blue, every now and then. But resolution, fuck, every new years day, you can't give 'em away fast enough. You can't sell 'em. They're just there. So resolutions to me are like wet toilet paper.

So there. I did my best. Hope it makes some sort of sense; at minimum, non-sense.

Cheers, bro. And if I have misspoken, forgive me, for it is not me, but the blend I am currently imbibing finding its way into the mix.

Pax

 

[Billville]

Okay. So maybe I was wrong with throwing our conflicted feelings solely on the shoulders of artists. I forgot about the Scotch makers. Here's a toast to the other gods secret amongst us!

 

[homeless mind]

Cheers, my brother. To your health and good fortune.

 

[Billville]

Cheers. And may you stick to all your new years resolutions--bottled or canned!

 

[slimedog]

I wouldn't give a rats ass for art because if I had one I would cherish and keep it in a warm, safe place and take it out at night and hold it tightly to my bosom.

 

[Gerard K H Love]

Now what do you geniuses think of these: Great salesmen are true artists. Sales is an art form.
I know that both statements are true.

....and it pays the rent and the payments on the Ferrari.

 

[homeless mind]

You'll have to find the genius of the crowd, but since he (or she) doesn't seem available at the moment, my response will have to do, temporarily, of course....

Artists of the tongue, yes, G-Love, but nothing tangible created. Would they fall under the category of "Bullshit Artist?" Methinks it may be so... Hmmm. :p

 

[scribbler]

"The 'drag' is for me, the ash is for the tray." Our hero summing up the purpose of his efforts.

We here in the tray are quite enjoying those ashes, so we can only imagine what that "drag" felt like. So we all must take our OWN drag... and you might get paid for the resulting ashes (rest), but they they can only wish for the drag.

 

[CRBSMILE]

Don't Try...


2 single words that can convey worlds of knowing. It's beyond religion for me, because it's written out of my language. My culture. To me, it's perfect poetry.


Words I've not seen contained in here yet:
Philistine
Collective Unconscious
Joy/Happiness
self-loathing
vanity
Dreams,(pipe & nighttime)
Contentment
Love

Art can be what is not there, as much as what is: words, notes, colors left un-chosen. Art is always personal at it's core, without the individual creator of it-IT can not exist. It comes from the human part of us. Monkeys do not paint, sing or write.
There are people who create beautiful personal works, never thinking of monetary gain: Family scrapbooks;fine wooden shelves for the living room; rebuilding grandpaps old car; sewing a shawl for a newborn. Are these things any less art than a work that sells for $$? Or maybe, are they more so? Does the individual that creates these things; then realizing they have an affinity and a talent for them and moveing forward creates a career... are they
a hack; a sell out? Does it matter? if I buy one of these items and it brings me joy and fullfillment? am I dumb, have I been taken?

What if everything that we do everyday is art? From taking a shit, to selling a car; to kissing someone we love, or smiling at a stranger through the glass?

Thanks to all for this thread, it's kept my mind busy for a few days as well as, kept me from my ART!;) Cheers!CRB:)

 

[Lolita Twist]

I feel as if I've been misinterpreted... I did not mean to say that all persons who produce art to make a living are "bad" or any other derragatory adjective/noun... what I meant was that, it is the people who produce "art" solely for the purpose of making mass amounts of soul-less money, without any regard or care for the caliber of their alleged "art" are just simply awful, in all connotations of the word. That is just my feeling.

IE) Most over-publicized modern-day pop artists and younger actors/actresses who are associated with the "teenage movie/music" variety of things (Miley Cyrus, Lindsey Lohan, Paris Hilton, Ashley Simpson, etc etc)

 

[Ninjerk]

People who create art to pay the rent are...icky, to me.

I feel as if I've been misinterpreted... I did not mean to say that all persons who produce art to make a living are "bad" or any other derragatory adjective/noun...

It's not exactly a stretch from one thought to the other. Pop stars tend not to be thought of as, "paying the rent," either.

 

[homeless mind]

More Thoughts On Art, Will Change By Tomorrow

Mrs. G.: I now believe you meant no offense with your statement; but as a writer, you should know the weight of words. Without having to wait for a response, from the likes of a %$#@* like me.

Here's my revisionist thought; which will change by tomorrow. I, unlike some, dig revisions; as life alters on a moment's notice.

And please let me be clear: If anyone doesn't like what I have to say, please feel free to skip over all my posts, as they are not required reading; and are merely the POV of the back-end of a donkey.

Art should not be created for money. It should be created for art's sake. Now, I'm a hypocrite. I don't mind living within a paradoxical box. Because at this stage of my career, I can. But, as all professional artist's know, selling is one of the reasons for working. People may think that is not romantic, but so be it. The daily toil. The ideas. Striving to create the next great piece: painting, writing, sculpting, a new riff, whatever. I can only speak for myself, being fortunate enuf to get paid for my creative work: painting, writing, working with musicians, and other creative forms of expression; but I'm sure I'm not alone here.

But sometimes it gets hard to hear people on the soapbox.

Preaching about the integrity of art, without having paid the fucking dues. American Idol is not real. I have paid them, dues, my entire adult life. No regrets. Good times, bad times, good times, bad times. And good times. But the bad times can come just as quickly, once again. Ask any artist, I don't give a fuck who it is. Or any writer, actor, musician, etc. I know a bunch. It's the same fucking shit. For all of us. In any field of employment today.

Fame is a fickle motherfucker. Fatherfucker, too.

Jimmy Durante said it best; something like this: Treat the people kindly on the way up, because you will see them on the way down....

I wish everyone success. And I hope it comes easier for you than it has for the laundry list of people who have broken their balls to get there; and the ones who are still breaking their balls to succeed.

Pax