Lol, yeah, I don't normally make journals that go over concepts like this, but I'll tell you something; This guy has been going on for the past couple weeks over his skewed views on this, and has singled out artists on his page if they don't fit in his definitions. Not just that, but he's gone out and harassed other artists, and made some gross over-exaggerations while shamelessly playing the victim card.
To be honest, he may just be a troll, but I know many people who choose to do what they want on their site, and may like to avoid some unnecessary harassment.
But we'll get to that.
What it boils down to is that this person, who calls themselves TheCunningCondor
, has inspired me, so to speak. His continued elitism on this subject has allowed me to really sit down and think a few things through, which I hope to cover.
First and foremost, I want this journal to be about my own philosophy on art as a whole. Not a specific medium, style, technique, or what have you. Just art. As a student, I'm gonna start getting real cheesy, okay? It's just something I'm really passionate about, and feel very strongly for, so yeah, you've been warned.
Much like living, art has a very loose denotation that can be applied to pretty much anything that is created, performed, etc. I'm not going to argue that. Lots of people argue that art should make someone feel something, but I don't really even believe that. Let me boil it down for you; You could take The Mona Lisa, for example, and put it next to whatever you want. Just think of an object, a performance, a film... just a piece of what could be defined as art work. Regardless of how different these two things may be, or the variation of quality between the two, it does not devalue one as a piece of art.
This applies to literally anything. Style, its reason for being made, technique, skill level, medium, and subject matter have nothing to do with it. You can argue quality levels, monetary worth, who it's suitable for, or subjective things like that all you want. You can personally decide how much you like it, or judge it objectively with a well-thought critique. Judge a creation however you feel, but when all is said and done, that doesn't change what it is at its very core.
Art is art, when you get right down to it.
That said, why on earth should you ever feel bad for what you choose to do with art?
Motivation for creating can come from literally anything. Some people do it for fun, some people do it to show off. Others choose to learn, others make a living off of it. This doesn't mean that the product of the desire to create isn't art.
A subject matter may not appeal from person to person, but if you like doing it, nothing should stop you. I mean, unless you're gutting people and trying to display the corpses as art, but I'm pretty sure none of you do that.
Many different concepts have been the focus of art since the very beginning; These can range from admirable to completely depraved to somewhere in between. This doesn't change the fact that they're art. Hell, some of them even fit the definition of fine art.
Really, it's what you make of it. No one has the right to say whether or not something is art, but everyone has the right to decide whether or not what they make is art.
That said, what are your motivations? What kind of art do you do? Do you perform, film, draw, sculpt, or something else? What do you wish to depict? As an artist, it's your job to answer these questions for yourself. Sometimes the answers may change, or you may have multiple responses. However, regardless of what they may be, keep making art, mate. Learn, improve, appreciate, and have fun.
Or, at least, that's my perspective.
Honestly, you can believe what you want to as long as you're not a dick about it.