Who wins?
Art is not for artists
Art is for audiences
Art is for collectors
Art is for "posterity"
But those who create?
They should be happy just to be able to enjoy their talent.
posted by Lane Savant at 9:00 PM
Sunday, July 03, 2011
Art is not for artists
Art is for audiences
Art is for collectors
Art is for "posterity"
But those who create?
They should be happy just to be able to enjoy their talent.
19 Comments:
Lame, but I was in a hurry.
Absolutely. Lame? Not at all, in fact, it is forthright and profound in a lovely simple way.
sadly, most of the artists (especially poor Vincent) suffered more than they enjoyed it seems.
best wishes, Isabel
…true! as an artist, myself, i can deeply relate to this harsh fate… :(
~Kelvin
enjoyed this, very playful.
...not enough happy faces from the talented, sadly. But this one makes me smile........!
So very true!
What price an extension of the artist?
That is so true. Artists should revel--first and foremost--in their talent. IF they please others and IF they become "known" and IF they become a bit better off because of their gift...that's gravy!
Very cool take on the prompt!
however, no matter how hasty our words, they still have impact. What you said was true. :-)
Oh, so true!! Nicely done!
Different approach...great.
I enjoyed it very much =)
Feel free to be lame,
even though you find
your self leagues from
it as you drop your acerbic
wit onto us, and we love it.
Hallo, Lane!!
Could not something similar be said for composers??
Tschuess,
Anonomann
Interesting take on your view of art and creating as two differnt things. Not lame, it made me think.
Dear Lane: Do talented artist know they have talent? Do they just "do"? Create for the sake of creating; a process like eating or breathing? Very profound philo here!
.... if only.
Post a Comment
<< Home