why anti-art? (slightly ot ranrish)

[Silver Griffon]

Now THIS is a rant!

Almost anyone who can read at a high school graduate level and whose hands don't shake can learn to be a mechanic, a plumber, a salesman, a doctor, or president of the USA.
The same can not be said for becoming an artist.
Or a good writer, etc.
Creativity is the most valuable quality in any human being.
Followed, in order, by compassion and intelligence.
An artist is a creative thinker.
Every great thinker has been a creative thinker.
Even in mathematics and other sciences, which many people do not think of as creative fields. Einstein came up with new ideas from the creative portion of his mind. Not the analytical side. Stephen Hawkings is very witty and creative. They are artists too.
People who can do lightning quick mathematical calculations in their head but who lack creativity have never contributed anything more to the world than a pocket calculator.
That said, Art is communication. How much it is worth to you depends on whether or not you recieve the message, and what the emotion or idea behind that message means to you.
An important thing to remember, though is that not everyone who can make a picture is an artist and not every picture is art.
A given piece is one of three things to you: art, a nice picture, or just crap. And its not the same thing to everybody.
So yes, true art is priceless. On the other hand, some of this crap is just way too expensive.

A good rant starts off on topic, rages around all over the place, and lands back sort of where it started.

 

[alsih2o]

There's a difference between:

"That's more than I'm willing to pay."

and

"That's more than the art is worth."

One is perfectly understandable. One is insulting.

PREACH!! MY POINT EXACTLY

 

[alsih2o]

Ouch!

Speaking of your work, how can someone like me, who simply adores hand made pottery, buy some of your work?

email me. one of the tangent benefits of enworld for me has been multiple people ffering to help em set up a website, and i should have one soon after i return. until then, you can email me, and i can make most anything you want. i have spent a large part of my career as a "hired gun" producing other peoples vision of pots, sometimes even subcontracting work that other sign

 

[alsih2o]

i agree with almost everything said by veryone in this thread.(with special agreement to pkitty, i follow the same rule)

at can be highly subjective and value is percieved, concepts i have no problem with.

what i do have a problem with is people who feel teh need to chime in and shout "not worth it". if it isn't worth it move on, it is not a neccesary commodity. whay would one take the time to bash someones prices in a thread or email tho?

thanks everyoen here for making me feel much better, this community always comes thru

 

[KnowTheToe]

I love looking at artwork, but own very little. I often meander through art stores and visit museums, but I own very little, one piece actually. I have many things decorating my walls and shelves, but only one piece that I would call art.

It was one of those paintings you see and say, I want that, then you find out the price is many times what you would have normally expected to pay and then you find your debit card out on the counter.

Because my taste in art changes and most of what I like, I do not neccessarily want in my house, I do not buy it, but just spend hours looking at it.

 

[Henry]

Re: Now THIS is a rant!

Almost anyone who can read at a high school graduate level and whose hands don't shake can learn to be a mechanic, a plumber, a salesman, a doctor, or president of the USA.

I beg to differ on this point - and the same goes for art.

Anyone can learn to be a plumber, salesman, doctor, or ARTIST.

Not everyone can learn to be a GOOD plumber/salesman/doctor/artist.

I have known personally about 20 professional salespeople in my life. Only 4 or them have lasted more than a year as a commissioned-only salesperson. And all 4 of them had the obvious sense of timing and intrapersonal skills to do it. Everyone else I know dropped out of commissioned-only sales and went to jobs where commissions only made up part or none of their salaries.

Creativity is the most valuable quality in any human being.

I have to disagree here. Having a solid and reliable character is the most valuable quality. People can learn to a degree to express their innate repressed creativity, though some have it more than others, and I do not dsipute its value as a trait. However, personal strength of character cannot ever be taught, because it is attained over the course of your life and experience, and if some argue it can, even then only after years of personal re-training. Most business courses have this same concept, and I have to agree.

--------------------

Back to my point - Instead of discussing why some people don't accept what some artists feel they are worth, why don't we ask ACTUAL artists who make a living in the field what their money situation is like (not exact figures, but general tax bracket.) and ask them their best advice for succeeding in getting people to pay top dollar for their art? To quote an old saying, "Nothing succeeds like success." The best way to find the answers, is to find the successful people, and ask them if they will answer our questions.

 

[alsih2o]

Because my taste in art changes and most of what I like, I do not neccessarily want in my house, I do not buy it, but just spend hours looking at it.

most artist appreciate an appreciator just as much as a buyer. i have been known to give many pieces to people who loved them but could not afford them

 

[barsoomcore]

I understand your frustration, alsih. There's no call for rudeness towards people who are sharing their work with us.

Maybe some people didn't consider that saying, "This work isn't worth the listed price," could be hurtful. Maybe they were really just trying to offer realistic criticism, and phrased it poorly.

One thing I have learned from a million workshops, criticisms and readings: The only proper response to ANY feedback, no matter what it may be or how it may be presented, is "Thank you." Even someone who insults you or your work has at least taken the time to look at it and tell you what they think. They deserve your thanks.

Arguing with them won't help. If you have to convince them it's better than they think -- it isn't. Listen to what they have to say, thank them, decide if you agree, and do what you need to do.

Like kick them through a stack of drywall, the obnoxious Philistines.

 

[WizarDru]

Some of you may be familiar with Groo by Sergio Aragones and Mark Evanier. Mark Evanier once told a story that is relevant to this discussion.

Evanier was with Aragones (who is not a native English speaker) at a comic-book convention. Aragones was doing on-demand sketches for fans of his various characters, most notably Groo. The cost of these sketches was $25 (and this was several years ago).

At one point, an irate comic-book fan walked up, and watched as another fan approached and requested a sketch. Aragones happily complied, and after a few short minutes, had produced a sketch of Groo, signed and personalized. The irate observer then asked, "That's it? For $25? That was, what, three minutes worth of work?!?"

Evanier looked up at the irate fan as the other took his sketch and departed.

"You're not paying for the three minutes or the pencil and paper. You're paying for the 25 years of skill and practice that it took to generate it."

And with that, the irate person left.

 

[Mallus]

What I in general don't understand is why a local artist should expect anyone to want to pay several hundred dollars for a peice of work which has no private meaning to the buyer and is of reutine quality in a world filled with thousands of local artists - especially painters and photographers - of reasonably good quality.

Celebrim, isn't the private meaning a work of art holds for a person established upon viewing/experiencing the work? How would any artist know what meanings{s} a piece holds beforehand, except to themselves? Unless the subject of the work was so banal as to have only one possible reaction {say, a cute puppy. Everyone loves puppies}.

If you're suggesting that artist only create works with the lowest common denominator appeal {and thus the least private, most publically agreed upon meaning}, then you're talking about the end of the personal experience of art, and pretty much the functional end of art itself. And this isn't a aesthetic/critical point I'm making. I'm operating under the simple belief that the easiest way to lose a target audiences interest is to give them exactly what the think they want. The result is formulaic product that fails to interest the audience because they've seen it all before. Think of the current state of pop music, blockbuster films written by comittee, etc.

And this last part is I think a critical point. In 'modern art' movements, artists are schooled to believe that the purpose of thier art is to please themselves. The problem seems particularly bad to me among painters. They are apparantly taught to personally express themselves according to thier own tastes and desires and secret meanings. That is fine - and I'm sure it is very satisfying - but, I don't understand how that relates to being successful in the profession of artist. The real artists that I admire are 'sell outs', who do work on commision intended to have great meaning to the buyer or the buyer's target audience.

But then you've reduced art to a mere collection of {assumedly} pretty images with broad, consensus meanings. In other words, you've stripped art of any ability to convey a little of what its like to experience the world from anothers point to view. To see the way another assembles meanings, experiences emotions, just... lives. And replaced it a big canvas full of images of puppies {note: I really do like puppies}.

And consider what would happen if working artist did exactly what you suggest and created nothing but what they preceived their audiences wanted. There'd be no innovation. No new forms. Do you like jazz, the blues, rock and roll, hip hop? How would any of these come about without individual artists, personally expressing themselves?

Sorry for the hyperbole. I'll retire my soapbox for now...