Sure, you may be a singer. Or a poet. Or a photographer. Or whatever it is that you do. But what qualifies you as an artist? For some reason it always sounds a bit pretentious to me when people refer to themselves as artists.
I don't mind it I just hate people tha claim to be an artist when all they do is throw random colors on a canvas. I'm reffering to modern art. Most modern art I se ook like a three your old finger painting. THere was one 'painting' I heard of where all it was was a on-colored box. ONE COLOR ad it's considered art. (Also IMO alot of music I hear from todays popular musicians seems like a three year old threw random chords in a random order)
Sure, you may be a singer. Or a poet. Or a photographer. Or whatever it is that you do. But what qualifies you as an artist? For some reason it always sounds a bit pretentious to me when people refer to themselves as artists.hobbez
Technically there are no limitations on what an artist actually needs to qualify as an artist.
You get art in practically every media there is so Singers, Poets, Photographers, Film Makers etc etc are artists since they create new material, alter old material to mean something else or do a whole multitude of things that require imagination and creative instinct.
And considering destruction is a form of creation quite literally everyone can be an artist. And probably at one point or another everyone has been even if they didn't class it as such.
I am an artist but I wouldn't expect people like you to understand...
...just kidding. What annoys me is when people think their art is so fantastic and abstract that only people "on their level" would ever understand it and that therefore you can't have an opinion about it.
[QUOTE="xaos"]I can beat that; I know a local aspiring film director who refers to himself as an "auteur". I consider that to be WAY pretentious.espoac
maybe somebody should tell him that auteur means author(of a book) in French. Artist would be artiste. "Auteur" is used to describe accomplished film directors, such as Francis Ford Coppola or Martin Scorsese. For someone to assign the title to themselves just reeks of hubris to me.
I don't mind it I just hate people tha claim to be an artist when all they do is throw random colors on a canvas. I'm reffering to modern art. Most modern art I se ook like a three your old finger painting. THere was one 'painting' I heard of where all it was was a on-colored box. ONE COLOR ad it's considered art. (Also IMO alot of music I hear from todays popular musicians seems like a three year old threw random chords in a random order)o_sausage
Aristotle said a practitioner of an art is just that: a practitioner of an art. To be an artist, one must not only be a proficient practitioner who contributes to the overall betterment of his craft, but must also be able to teach others to further build upon his work.
I took a picture of a old rocking chair next to a shed on an autumn day, and the shadow of the shed casts onto the chair. Then i put it into black and white.
Im an artist because of that :lol:
I hate those girls in art class in high school who think theyre artists because they take stupid cliche pictures such as the one described above haha.
Log in to comment