next »

[anonymous]

Is me doing the generalization? I'm telling you here it's a challenge I oppose because i do not agree, where did I define art?

However I have no problem with people doing just that, I do have problem when they start going all gung ho about they are the definition of art and artist when it's only limited by ego. Notice the "I".

ignoring ego as if it's not there, is not the same as having no ego... there's healthy ego and then there's unhealthy ego, might just be my understanding...

[Inanimate]

there is no "I" in "TEAIM"

[gimymblert]

@Gr@mpa
Yep, It's just the "I want to be an artist to feel I'm special" kind that bother me, yay for unique snowflake

[anonymous]

it's easy to see faults of others and not our own

[bento_smile]

Anyone who feels special for being an artist obviously hasn't stepped outside their front door in a loooong time!  

[s0]

i mak gams as a hobby because its fun. crucify me.

[gimymblert]

I'm very open on my own failure, and trust I had a lot, and most notably I attack this mindset because it use to be mine until I really had to push myself out the comfort zone and realizing there is more than candyland.

@Casinclair
if casinclair=unik snowflak
crucify
else
return

[anonymous]

every point and view is valid? end of discussion? having a discussion while debating understandings we don't ourselves have, is pointless, mind is fickle and flippant.

[s0]

I'm very open on my own failure, and trust I had a lot, and most notably I attack this mindset because it use to be mine until I really had to push myself out the comfort zone and realizing there is more than candyland.

It's funny because I had almost exactly the reverse experience with my music.

[gimymblert]

I think it's easier to gain confidence with drawing as a child, as it's more accessible and portable than music (you can draw anywhere) it's very easy to  grew with a safe set of tropes. Also skill is less important as there is a huge part of symbolic recognition, I found drawing to be a bit more "transactional" than music. Also you can zone out in your little drawing world of ninja turtle and scrooge mc duck rip off, longer than music where listening take that function. Unless you have greay musician parent with great equipment that allow you to not annoy them while you make it (my experience, why I never took off with music and sculpture, lol) Quietness of drawing help. But being the best ninja turtle drawer does not make you an artist right? Music is a bit more tolerant to style, abstract quality also help.

[s0]

i think it's just as easy to get lost in tropes as a musician (look at all those youtube guitarists for instance).

anyway, i used be into the radical avantgarde, high-concept formalist thing (in music, but that's secondary) but eventually grew dissatisfied with it. most of the art i enjoy and find fascinating these days was made according to the "ego principle" and doesn't try to be "cutting-edge" or "innovative" or follow any particular "school" of thought or whatever.

[gimymblert]

I'm not into avant garde stuff that much either, it's more about value I share, I'm more for a balance. But some people try to cut it off, I think all option are good and inseminate each other.

I mean look at great artist AND great entertainer (they can be both), they always had connection to all influence, Disney was a huge fan of abstract animation and import a lot of things into its work, it didn't stop to the cartoony plastic style of the time. Tezuka was even more far reaching and have a greater legacy in animation, bridging literature, entertainment comics and animation and creating new format and expressive technique. Etc...

The ego is great when he nourish itself from many influence.
Being insular is not enough obviously, but that's not a problem. The problem is when the ego is the whole world and try to cut all those influence to exist, actively preventing them from emerging, while regurgitating stuff that are not much personal but things they "like". Liking something and having it personal is not the same.

I mean compare romero's zombie to other movie, zombies are now only reminder of their concept instead of embodiment of the concept, great zombie movie recapture a feel or create a new feel for it. Do we have that in game? We had it in the first batch of silent hill (or siren), i'm not sure about other game where they are like showing mickey, the pleasure is more in the recognition of the symbol than the emotion conveyed.

And that's most so called artist/creator lost track of, they are not capable of recreating that first "meeting" when zombie where made cool because, not of recognition, but raw execution. The task of an artist is to replicate that "meeting" at worst not to imitate the superficial form, at best to create a new meeting. Can you make me love something I didn't know I would like? Can you make the uncool awesome? Can you show new perspective? Now you are not lazy! And sometimes it mean realizing you are boring and seek deep inside, in the "fog" what it mean be "self".

Edit:
If you look carefully you can a lot of art are just "mickey cameo" and "solemn trick" (think bible movie tone).

[s0]

then we're more or less in agreement.

EDIT: not quite. there's nothing wrong with referencing things. postmodernists have been doing it for decades. and who are you to tell anyone what the "task of an artist" is?

[1982]

Can you make me love something I didn't know I would like?
Can you make the uncool awesome?
Can you show new perspective?
Now you are not lazy!

Why should I?
Define uncool.
Why should I?
I don't agree on your definition of lazy. You basically define other people laziness through yourself or any other subjective (art is very subjective from all the subjective things) observer.

[gimymblert]

is art subjective or everything is?
If everything is subjective why would we bother asking and answering?
I mean look objectivity, obviously it's subjective as the moment we need it and invoke it it's when we feel we need it, if feeling invoke objectivity and task it to solve a question, it made it completely subjective... Right?




I use negation of lazyness does that mean the opposite is lazy or its your interpretation? Objectively (subjectively then) I did not define lzayness (or lazy) because whenever I say lazy it was with a negation. That's so deep man, is !(!lazy)=lazy



I mean is the only thing that does not change is change, as its property of changing is permanent, if change stop changing it would change and then will not be what it is ...

More seriously, of course it's subjective, I'm sharing my value, I never claim it was objective nort a definitive definition of anything, I'm telling you I don't value this for this reason. It's pretty much a judgement, now if you are a man of no value and does not hold anything as worth ... Which you don't seems to e, but I least you can understand where I come from.

Also I don't like this phrase "art is subjective" provide strong evidence of this plz art is ABOUT subjectivity, art isn't subjective

[im9today]

is games art?

[s0]

i think the problem here is more fundamental. it's a clash of two different approaches to discussion and i guess two different mindsets. people like you or paul eres discuss things dispassionately and from a neutral point of using logic and reason, whereas i (and i suppose other people ITT as well, though i don't claim to speak for anyone but myself) generally don't participate in a discussion unless i have some kind of emotional stake in it.

[gimymblert]

Illogical, does not compute

[s0]

isn't spock half-human and can therefore still feel some emotions or sth? idk i've never been much of a star trek fan.

[im9today]

is art spok?