okay
firstly sorry for not having posted in ages, the internet connection of my entire COUNTRY was down (and you gotta know that thats just SAD) so we werent able to log on.
with that out of the way
considering the fact that no one comments on my blog (cause i hardly ever update it i know i know) i wanna invite you guys to argue on something that me and mina started on.
Do you think its important to think of yourself as an artist, because it would push you as an artist to work harder etc, or do you believe that its detrimental to think of yourself as an artist, because it would make you feel too comfortable in the role, you get cushy, and you stop pushing yourself.
in particularly i wanna hear minas and alis opinions on this.
laterz
firstly sorry for not having posted in ages, the internet connection of my entire COUNTRY was down (and you gotta know that thats just SAD) so we werent able to log on.
with that out of the way
considering the fact that no one comments on my blog (cause i hardly ever update it i know i know) i wanna invite you guys to argue on something that me and mina started on.
Do you think its important to think of yourself as an artist, because it would push you as an artist to work harder etc, or do you believe that its detrimental to think of yourself as an artist, because it would make you feel too comfortable in the role, you get cushy, and you stop pushing yourself.
in particularly i wanna hear minas and alis opinions on this.
laterz
-2.jpg)
13 Comments:
i don't have an opinion, i just wanted to post a comment so the little numbers would turn to 1. :D
think of yourself in whatever way you will. just remember that you're never good enough for yourself! other people--readers, viewers, audiences--rarely drive anyone to greatness.
if you're going to remember anything, i think it's more worthwhile to remember what made you want to be an artist in the first place.
the idea of art kills creativity. all creative shit starts out as fun and fossilises into art, which is what critics then blab about. just think of yourself as a craftsman/ works of craft rule out over works of art anyday.
hub (all serious and shit at 10 am in elab, logged on the 12th of July, 2005.
at this historic spot, hub talked logic for five minutes)
you don't have to make a conscious decision keh acha now i am an artist, now i am a writer. it's in your bones, you know it, it colours the way you live your life. i call myself a writer because i am proud of my craft, and i think it's important to acknowledge it so you can nurture it. even people born with talent have to nurture it, else it goes away into a place you have to work double hard to get it out from. and of course, creation is always for yourself, to pull out the barbs from under your skin for a while....personally i think there is no such thing as true art (and 'art' here is an all-encompassing term) without the blood and guts and agony of inspiration. the rest is hollow, contrived crap. so yep, you have to know yourself as an artist to keep it alive. it's kind of like honouring it, keeping a flame alive. pissed off, attention-starved muses are deadly hard to wheedle into action.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
i concur with what mina says. will add a bit: there is no one point where you can say: okay, NOW i am an artist. i think art is a way of understanding reality, and is an ongoing process, an approach towards living. abandon that any second, you cease being an artist.
so, i dont think that you need to 'think' of yourself as an artist per se. rather, you need to be conscious of where your perception of the world lies: artistic, religious, scientific, etc. (Salman you kow where this is coming from :D)
-bilal
WOW seven comments i think thats a record on this site :p in fact im surprised you all still visit here :)
now for my two cents... i completely agree with saad... you get compliments all the time from people but to actually think "you know what... im GOOD" is in my head completely detrimental... it makes you lazy.. cushy.. instead of being cut edged and sharp... for me the greatest compliment i would ever give my work or myself is you know what.. i aint that bad... and thats it.. its the drive inside to do BETTEr, that keeps me going.
Mina: personally.. i dont think its in your bones... maybe thats because the difference between me and you is that writing was sometghing you ALWAYS wanted to do with your life... whereas i love my art and my music it has only recently begun to be more then just my hobby... maybe there are people with "talent" and they feel it burning away inside them... but then who decides who the talented ones are? i push myself to draw, to photograph, it isnt a necessary part of my being... but i like it so i do it, and when i get lazy i push myself back into it.
I guess the main contention i have, is that if you think of yourself as an "artist" be it writer photographer whatever, you begin to ascribe to become the IMAGe of the artist that you ahve created inside your head (whatever that image may be)... and THAT kills YOU... becoming the image kills YOU. because your no longer real...
if you pick out a name in history, anyone recognized as a great artist in his/her respective craft, you'll see that they were talented yet raw at the beginning. The refinement with age and practice made them geniuses. but for whatever reasons, SOME of them stagnated after a certain point. i believe that that point comes when you allow your audience's perception of your work to get to your head. which could also be translated into meaning that you start thinking of yourself as an "artist' rather than someone who has a bit of talent and is working towards refining it. which is what i gater from both Mina and Bilal as well.
so you think you're an artist and you stagnate!
I think I'm a Princess...
been reading this for a while now, and i really need to say something now though i don't want to but hey ..
i don't understand why if someone thinks of him/her self as an artist means that he/she would start ascribing to a certain image that they've conjured up in their minds.
there's a distinction between you thinking of yourself as an artist because you believe it to be or you thinking of yourself as an artist because the world says so.
what saad says here is the case for the people who believe themselves to be artists because they've been labelled as such by the world. they are basing their thoughts on the opinions of others.
however, there are those who think of themselves as artists because they believe that they are artists.
like mina said, "it's in your bones, you know it, it colours the way you live your life".
Basically what i'm trying to say is that the opinions of both sides are correct. it's just that you're arguing over two slightly different things.
Peace.
:)
All your questions are answered at a place called Stern :p
Hey, if you're fueling the zeitgeist, kudos to you. Alternatively, if you're part of the cohort, you're basically part of cultures marketing package. Contrary to earlier remarks, I feel that art is omnipresent. Such is the theme adopted by religion (including Athiesm, which is as complete a religion as could be). To draw a defenitive distinction between Art, creativity and craft IMHO is to undermine the acuity of the artist, artist being an all encompassing term applicable to every human being. To refute the restrictive idea of art being the brainchild of fun, as presented earlier, I would consider (for the sake of convenience, since the idea has already been introduced) religion. There is or was little fun associated with introducing religious or moral codes of conduct. Yet, if anything, they are held as works of art today. To overstate the general emotion, I personally feel that, in essence their religious value undermines their artistic importance.
More often than not we find that the critic in us is overtaking the audience. Although I understand the context earlier criticism was posted under, I feel that we can not paint with that large a brush.
With Saad's comment I agree in general. Often artists consume themselves with their audiences. Yet, true art has two facets - that which is produced for the sake of art and that which is produced with the intent to educate. To take nothing away from their artistic potential, I refuse to admit that The Beatles were at any point incapable of producing Sgt.Peppers, yet it came much after the British Invasion so as to assure a higher rate of acceptance. I think that Socrates made an artistic statement by committing suicide (I'm convinced it was), realising his responsibility as an artist and as an educator. They certainly beleived they were artists. So think of yourself an artist if you can stand by your art. The cliched concept of "Art imitating life" should begin with your own.
P.S : Excuse the soliloquy. I understand that most of the posts here try to draw a distinction between (again for the sake of convenience) Bob Dylan and The Ying Yang Twins.
Post a Comment
<< Home