Sunday, August 10, 2008

express yourself honestly.

Sunday, July 20, 2008

something in marketing:

Ah, the way of art. Art is there to reflect back what we are or was going through in life at a particular moment in time. The trigger of memories, feelings, or thoughts, is priceless.....

Fame is relative. There are still people on this planet who dont know Van gogh, yet their local artists would be considered famous to them, yet we wouldnt know anything about their local artists. So world/culture, art is relative....hmmmm, But it just so happens that the Western culture has integrated (or marketed) themselves on a world wide level. hmmmmm indeed.....

So there seemed to be some "ingenious" people that developed the "art" of marketing.... another skill that certain people hone on to and develop....... So you put together two really good "artists" of two different crafts (or even add a third artist [Music] or fourth {writer}, then you get "Hollywooooooooooood"!!!!!

The woes of being an artist:

WHAT DOES ART HAVE TO WITH MONEY AND THE BUY INTO CONSUMERISM AND WASTING OF YOUR TIME THINKING ABOUT IT. i F YOU REALLY WANT TO ACCOMPLISH SOMETHING IN LIFE TRY TO PLEASE YOUSELF.........THE ART IS JUST SHIT AND YOU THE ARTIST IS WHAT'S IMPORTANT. "BEHIND EVRY FORTURE IS A CRIME" BALZAC........................are you tring to be a criminal?

- Don

Oh No

I think i'm gimmicky. Darn.

Random pulls from Forums

My friend, think of Van Gogh. He came from a family of artists. His brother, and supporter, was an art dealer. Yet he only sold one painting in his lifetime. Should we judge him by that? How's the old saying go???? some people seek fame, others have it thrust upon them. Just be an artist, let the world decide. V.G.

Some artist create thier whole lives unknown, like Van Gogh, and become famous decades later. Others are born into fame, like Andrew Wyeth. de Kooning use to sell his work for 50 bucks. I believe that these artist became known because of the quality of their works. However there are artist who are well known who certainly don't deserve the credit, because their works are nothing more then a gimmick.
-another dude

In the end, the artist, for whatever reason... must win the favor of critics, art historians, and top art collectors. This does not mean that the artist must win it directly... the work must simply capture the taste of one person with power and influence and BAM!
-dude

Another interesting topic

"Agree. It's the keepers and the management who keep things running. Generation die and the things they made go with them. Family heirlooms get lost if no one keeps and maintain them. Same in the art world."

I wonder if internet servers/hosts will keep pictures done by artists within the data base of the internet. Data that becomes "memories" of life on the planet. The future we'll have data chips so small it will be able to hold vasts amounts of info. What if the planet already had gone through such a stage in technology and these data objects that contained the past are right under the dirt?

Interesting subject from a Forum:

famous artists usually have some things in common:

1. they belonged to some sort of group.
2. they were making strong personal statements that happened to resonate with a lot of people (they adapted their inclinations to what was "in the air" at the time)
3. they were in the right place at the right time (and often were not afraid to move to the right place)
4. they were able to find a mentor of some kind
5. their work pushed the envelope of the public's concept of art and often the establishment's (art can't go backwards)
6. their art usually reflected an influence from art of other cultures than their own
7. they usually do a LOT of work and often in a short period of time (creative fluency)
8. once they found their style, their work often follows a surprisingly narrow range of interpretation along that style