Archive for December, 2010

First of all, I just want to warn all of you people, that I’m running on no sleep so this entry might get a little weird. Or it might not. It’s just a warning. Also, I will be ranting about hipsters.
To be blunt, art in “popular culture” is bullshit, because honestly, the whole definition of “art” and “artist” has changed.
You have your Urban Outfitter carbon copy hipster kids who all think they’re photographers because they took a picture of a very skinny girl with a Native American headdress with their oh-so-trendy Polaroid OneStep SX70 Land Camera, desaturated it, wrote lyrics to some song that they like on top of it, and uploaded it to their Flickr.
You have your pseudo-intellectual Frasier Craine types who see something expensive in a small boutique that looks like it was made in some faraway African tribal community and you think how awesome it would look in your loft.
You have your people who think food photography is “selling out” and would rather sit there in a studio for seventeen straight hours photographing skin or something completely irrelevant, just so people think you’re “abstract” or saying something important.
No, these are not definitively artists. An artist is someone who makes a living off of being artistic. That’s an artist. It’s a job. Why else would you pump thousands and thousands of dollars into school to learn how to become one. I don’t care if someone told you that if you express yourself you are an artist, or if you are creative you are an artist, or if you smoke so much salvia that you nearly travel to different dimensions and then write about it that you’re an artist. No, that’s called being artistic. Most people are artistic. Not everyone, I realize. Some people’s creative and fun-loving beauty-seeing souls have been murdered by corporate America (or something), but I guarantee that everyone can be artistic if they want to be.
If you were an artist, in this economy, you wouldn’t use a Polaroid camera at parties for anything other than the sake of being artistic because it’s completely ridiculous. If you make a living off of your art, chances are, in this economy, you simply don’t have the cash to throw down, what is it? $30 for a pack of 10 exposures.

Go home.

I can only speak for photography because that is basically the kind of art I have been immersed in for the past 3 years, and I only really know of the fake-ness in my area of study, but I do know that that specifically makes me angry.
I hate going on Tumblr and posting something genuinely beautiful that I spent tons of time and effort on, only to get looked over because the millionth person has to reblog that pretentious photo of that pretty delicate girl on a bike that was made before her parents even dreamed of having children for the millionth time.

Also, when I was a small Freshie here at Columbia, I had to take Fundamentals of 2D Design. Nevermind that it was the worst class I have ever taken in my entire existence, but one thing happened in that class that happens again and again in the “art community” that will never cease to make me angry, and that is teaching the “correct way” to “do art”. She told me that it is generally uninteresting and unartistic to stick things in the center of an image I am creating. Since when? Hasn’t that “oh, I’m at the side of the frame, looking off into the distance, smoking a cigarette” pose been done to death?

Could you look a little more prententious for me please? Thanks...

I feel like I want to do an entire project in her honor where I just stick crap in the middle of the frame and make it work. I feel like that works! How come in the popular modern art world that is considered wrong? You know what, I like the middle of the frame just fine. You know who usually puts things in the center of the frame? People who photograph ads. Do you want to know what photographers make a living? Photographers who photograph ads. Do you know what an artist is? It is someone whose job (as in making a living) is in art.




ART IN POP CULTURE.. for real????

I’m sorry, I just don’t get it. This era is a direct example of bull##it  art!!  It’s like if in the 90’s my generation (in response to Desert Storm and the hip hop wars)  started making all of these art forms with high top fades and air jordans??????  COME ON!! I think in every generation there is a ‘Pop Culture’.. or a way of doing something at a particular time.  And I think whatever those things are, rather it be in regards to style of music or dress; it is a form of ART. Because someone from that time came up with it, even if they were adding on to another culture from another time. I do enjoy art from the pop culture because it is poking fun to the new and technical way of doing things.

This is a very interesting topic. I’m trying to figure out how to start my comment. Okay, well. Here goes. Art has been influenced by politics for as long as politics has been in existence. I can make an educated guess and say that Art came before politics. Therefore, the knowledge of how Art generates emotions in humans; and how emotions can influence human decisions, was well known when politicians and even religious heads began to use it for themselves.  Art is funny that way. It can represent pure innocent yet confused inner feelings of an artist or it can represent the premeditated skill used by the unseen to persuade a naive passersby. It is a fact that many countries have paid their home artists with if not monetary wealth, indeed fame and prestige, in order to persuade them to represent an idea or thought  of their liking. This is very personal to me because it reminds me of the musical struggles that I face. There is an unseen hand that wants me to write songs that are not only vulgar in nature but evokes negative emotions and chaos. In exchange for these type of songs, I have promises of great wealth and such. To be an artist in that position is what creates suicides and inner turmoil. Thats what I have to say about that.


If you really think about it, I can’t think of two “jobs” that are more interconnected. Politics and art are, essentially the same thing. Let me explain myself.
What is art? What does it try to do? Art is a means in which a person expresses their feelings about the world around them. It could be something as simple as a beautiful postcard with the Hawaiian islands on it. The artist is trying to show you that Hawaii is a great place to vacation. The more complex you get, it’s still all the same. If the artist thinks their government is unfair, they might paint their president in a less than flattering light. Either way, the artists job is to express themselves in a way that impacts the world around them, so if they, for example, hate president Bush, they might make a song about how much he sucks (or sucked, for that matter) or paint a picture of him looking more like a money than he already does. The artist will try to impart their beliefs onto their audience. That is the whole point of art. It’s not to make money, that would be a bad reason to get into the art community. It’s not merely to express oneself, you could just do that in private and just expressing yourself is a lot like, and I’m going to quote Dennis from It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia,
“It is like flipping through a stack of photographs. If I’m not in any of them and nobody is having sex, I just don’t care.”
If you are making art merely for self expression, it’s not going to affect (or is it ‘effect’? I never know) anyone but the artist. The point of art is the change the world by changing the minds of other people. That is what an artist should be striving for.
A politician does the same thing. Whether or not a politician believes in what he/she is saying or promising, that politician is going to do their best to change the mind of the voters to be on their side. A politician would never just run for President because they feel like it. No, they do it because they feel the need to change their community. It’s for the best of the people (or at least, it should be).
Basically, politicians and artists are in the same business- changing their world for the better.