The No.1 Website for Pro Audio
 Search This Thread  Search This Forum  Search Reviews  Search Gear Database  Search Gear for sale  Search Gearslutz Go Advanced
Lack of respect in our industry for formal music or technical traininng.... Dynamics Plugins
Old 18th September 2007
  #211
Gear Guru
 
henryrobinett's Avatar
Yes, there is creativeness in all things, but I'm not going to cheapen the wrd ART by saying garbage men and business men are artists. There is a skill and a craft, but as defined as an aesthetic visionary who creates works of art that affect many through illumination and beauty, that counteracts or copies nature, that imprints mankind with emotional and intelligent imagination, no. That is not the purview of the garbage man or the record exec. The marketing man, in this case, is there to help facilitate the artist and his/their pocketbooks, or to take advantage of and provide the public with dissemination of this art.
Old 18th September 2007
  #212
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascottk View Post
I think education and practice turns talent in skill. A few members of my family have no musical talent whatsoever so they do not persue music. When I was young and started playing violin I had the talent to play some music by ear while some musicians need printed music.

I rely a lot on talent but some of those talents are not backed up by skill. I have the talent for drawing but no formal training in art so I have no skills in the art department. I have a talent for dealing with computers so I'm a student employee that takes care of the midi lab at school. My talent with computers is greater than a lot of students and professors at school so I end up helping a lot of people. Some professors have no talent at all with computers so you know where that puts me.

If people did not have talent, how would they know what to do with themselves?
Go to a 5 or 10 year HS reunion and you'll see that many don't.

The dictionary definition of talent includes skill (I just looked it up).


You're really just playing with words. You could jsut as easiely substitute lack of fear or eperience or confidence in any of the places that you swapped talent and skill.


I'll give you another example.

I was doing a session a week or two ago where we needed an improv out of an oboe player. She was great at reading, but this section wasn't written. Like many classical players, she didn't have the "talent" or "skill" to improvise.

So, what I did, was I held four fingers up in the air sideways as if they were a musicl staff and told her to play the notes I pointed to and the result was the perfect part that ended up being the final take.

I can tell you that the first note I pointed to would have been an F, but after that I was mostly making nonsensical squiggly lines in the air that didn't mean anything to me, so I can't see how they could have meant anythign to her. What she ended up playing was the absolute prefect part, somehow without "skill" or "talent" in improvising. So how did that part come out?


My take is that she didn't have enough faith in herself, but she did have enough faith in me, and that set her up to play without fear and doubt which released her voice as a musician. However, had she not been able to play without fear or doubt, that session would have been one more example of how classical players can't improvise, when clearly in her case that's not true, but we would ahve thought it to be true.


So, your familiy without talent - are they truly with out talent or do they just believe he are? Which of course creats the self-fulfilling prophecy of not working at it in a way that everyone has to to be good at anything. (This is a rhetorical question because it's unknowable).
Old 18th September 2007
  #213
Quote:
Originally Posted by henryrobinett View Post
Yes, there is creativeness in all things, but I'm not going to cheapen the wrd ART by saying garbage men and business men are artists. There is a skill and a craft, but as defined as an aesthetic visionary who creates works of art that affect many through illumination and beauty, that counteracts or copies nature, that imprints mankind with emotional and intelligent imagination, no. That is not the purview of the garbage man or the record exec. The marketing man, in this case, is there to help facilitate the artist and his/their pocketbooks, or to take advantage of and provide the public with dissemination of this art.
First, Warhole alread cheapened the word art, so don't worry about it.

Second you're being way too myopic with your defintion of art.

I could be wrong, but I'm preety sure you'd consider a brilliant ballet performance as being art, really any dance could potentially hit that status, right?

What about Dr J or Michael Jordan executing a move?

Often art is partly tied to the observer's ability to recognize it.
Old 18th September 2007
  #214
Motown legend
 
Bob Olhsson's Avatar
 

Part of the problem is that "self taught genius" has been a common image for popular music artists to adopt. In virtually every case I have any personal knowledge of, it was not really the truth.
Old 18th September 2007
  #215
no ssl yet
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by henryrobinett View Post
Yes, there is creativeness in all things, but I'm not going to cheapen the wrd ART by saying garbage men and business men are artists. There is a skill and a craft, but as defined as an aesthetic visionary who creates works of art that affect many through illumination and beauty, that counteracts or copies nature, that imprints mankind with emotional and intelligent imagination, no. That is not the purview of the garbage man or the record exec. The marketing man, in this case, is there to help facilitate the artist and his/their pocketbooks, or to take advantage of and provide the public with dissemination of this art.

Perhaps you should get out more. I don't know if I should say you seem a bit caught up in arrogance, or you just have a cynical view of what business people do that I don't support.. DO you think the word Art belongs to musicians?

What about heart surgeons?

There's an "art" to doing anything well. As far as businessmen go, what about famous economists? marketers etc...

How much do you actually know about the history of marketing? What you're doing is akin to a businessperson saying "guitar players just sit and play with those 6 strings"
Old 18th September 2007
  #216
Lives for gear
 
Empire Prod's Avatar
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by no ssl yet View Post
Ok so what "golden age" is our society declining from?

I'm not saying it's not but if it is, tell me about it.
As sad as it might sound, perhaps the US peaked in the 1950's. Perhaps even earlier (maybe pre-depression). It's obviously a matter of opinion.
Old 18th September 2007
  #217
Quote:
Originally Posted by no ssl yet View Post
There's an "art" to doing anything well. As far as businessmen go, what about famous economists? marketers etc...
You put the word "art" in quotes, perhaps you didn't intend this usage, but that's exactly how I'd write the sentence to indicate that what is called "art" in today's usage is not really an Art ("The application of skill to subjects of taste, as poetry, music, dancing, the drama, oratory, literary composition, and the like; esp. in mod. use: Skill displaying itself in perfection of workmanship, perfection of execution as an object in itself") engaged towards the creation of art works, but art as a personal technique ("Skill in doing anything as the result of knowledge and practice.")

Sorry. Marketing is not music, nor is it Art which ends in objects. It is marketing. The end result of marketing is not an artistic work nor a musical work. The act of doing marketing does not involve any of the skills, talents, and decision-making processes that go into making music or art and should not be confused with those vocations. Marketing of art works is a vocation which is important in this day for people to be able to locate new artists and musicians. Just as having quality manufactured CDs is essential for people to be able to listen to albums on a non-volatile storage media, but that doesn't make CD replicators "artists." That marketing is part of the audience's exposure to new works of art makes marketing important. Every part of the process is important in different ways. But most of the parts of the process are entirely non-musical and not concerned with the creation of Art.

Quote:
Richard Avedon's definition of art is anything done well.
That does not make an artist anyone who does anything well. Nor does it say that there is any relation between this near-useless definition of art and creativity.
Old 18th September 2007
  #218
Gear Head
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Caffrey View Post
Go to a 5 or 10 year HS reunion and you'll see that many don't.

The dictionary definition of talent includes skill (I just looked it up).
You didn't look up skill, did you?
http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_/skill.html
Quote:
1. ability to do something well: the ability to do something well, usually gained through training or experience

2. something requiring training to do well: something that requires training and experience to do well, e.g. an art or trade
Talent:
Quote:
3 : the natural endowments of a person
4 a : a special often creative or artistic aptitude b : general intelligence or mental power : ABILITY
5 : a person of talent or a group of persons of talent in a field or activity
Talent vs. Skill:
http://civpro.blogs.com/civil_proced...vs_talent.html
Quote:
I was just running and while I was running I was thinking about Skill vs. Talent. I mean by talent something you're born with, something you just know, and by skill something that you've learned through practice and experience and observation and study.
http://christacy.blogspot.com/2006/1...-vs-skill.html
Quote:
We tend to hire for Skill.
Skill is easily quantifiable - and can be qualified as well. Skill can be represented on paper. Skill is understandable - and Skill is not frightening.
But Skill does not tranform. Skill does not disrupt.
Skill enables Talent.

But we don't know how to hire for Talent.
Talent, instead, tends to group and cluster with Talent outside of the normal constraints and structures of business - often in response to rejection from business structures.
Quote:
You're really just playing with words. You could jsut as easiely substitute lack of fear or eperience or confidence in any of the places that you swapped talent and skill.
You're not doing your research. Talent does not require knowledge or discipline. Skill needs both.

Quote:
I'll give you another example.

I was doing a session a week or two ago where we needed an improv out of an oboe player. She was great at reading, but this section wasn't written. Like many classical players, she didn't have the "talent" or "skill" to improvise.

So, what I did, was I held four fingers up in the air sideways as if they were a musicl staff and told her to play the notes I pointed to and the result was the perfect part that ended up being the final take.

I can tell you that the first note I pointed to would have been an F, but after that I was mostly making nonsensical squiggly lines in the air that didn't mean anything to me, so I can't see how they could have meant anythign to her. What she ended up playing was the absolute prefect part, somehow without "skill" or "talent" in improvising. So how did that part come out?

My take is that she didn't have enough faith in herself, but she did have enough faith in me, and that set her up to play without fear and doubt which released her voice as a musician. However, had she not been able to play without fear or doubt, that session would have been one more example of how classical players can't improvise, when clearly in her case that's not true, but we would ahve thought it to be true.
She's not improvising, that's more like sight reading. She's reading your fingers.

Quote:
So, your familiy without talent - are they truly with out talent or do they just believe he are? Which of course creats the self-fulfilling prophecy of not working at it in a way that everyone has to to be good at anything. (This is a rhetorical question because it's unknowable).
They have talents, but not in music. They will improve if they had the knowledge and discipline.
Old 18th September 2007
  #219
Gear Guru
 
henryrobinett's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by no ssl yet View Post
Perhaps you should get out more. I don't know if I should say you seem a bit caught up in arrogance, or you just have a cynical view of what business people do that I don't support.. DO you think the word Art belongs to musicians?

What about heart surgeons?

There's an "art" to doing anything well. As far as businessmen go, what about famous economists? marketers etc...

How much do you actually know about the history of marketing? What you're doing is akin to a businessperson saying "guitar players just sit and play with those 6 strings"
Heart surgeons? Artists? No. Skill? Yes.

I think we're using different defintions of the word. Yes, sometimes the word "art" is used to convey the idea of skill. The "art" of motorcycle driving. This is not the defintion of art I'm referring to.

ART - 1. the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.

2 ( the arts) the various branches of creative activity, such as painting, music, literature, and dance : the visual arts | [in sing. ] the art of photography.

3 ( arts) subjects of study primarily concerned with the processes and products of human creativity and social life, such as languages, literature, and history (as contrasted with scientific or technical subjects) : the belief that the arts and sciences were incompatible | the Faculty of Arts.

This is not as in Def #4 a skill at doing a specified thing, typically one acquired through practice : the art of conversation.

I don't believe art belongs to musicians, or anybody. Painters, sculptures, writers, directors, dancers as well as those who appreciate it. But no matter how skillful one is, a lawyer is NOT an artist, per definitons 1, 2 and 3. 4 is a whole 'nuther definition.

I don't need to know the whole history of marketing to know that marketing is not art, per def 1, 2,and 3. It applies to #4, but I'm not talkng about #4. Marketing IS or at least CAN BE creative. But it is not art. If you think it's art, I think there's something wrong.
Old 18th September 2007
  #220
no ssl yet
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by henryrobinett View Post
Heart surgeons? Artists? No. Skill? Yes.

I think we're using different defintions of the word. Yes, sometimes the word "art" is used to convey the idea of skill. The "art" of motorcycle driving. This is not the defintion of art I'm referring to.

ART - 1. the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.

2 ( the arts) the various branches of creative activity, such as painting, music, literature, and dance : the visual arts | [in sing. ] the art of photography.

3 ( arts) subjects of study primarily concerned with the processes and products of human creativity and social life, such as languages, literature, and history (as contrasted with scientific or technical subjects) : the belief that the arts and sciences were incompatible | the Faculty of Arts.

This is not as in Def #4 a skill at doing a specified thing, typically one acquired through practice : the art of conversation.

I don't believe art belongs to musicians, or anybody. Painters, sculptures, writers, directors, dancers as well as those who appreciate it. But no matter how skillful one is, a lawyer is NOT an artist, per definitons 1, 2 and 3. 4 is a whole 'nuther definition.

I don't need to know the whole history of marketing to know that marketing is not art, per def 1, 2,and 3. It applies to #4, but I'm not talkng about #4. Marketing IS or at least CAN BE creative. But it is not art. If you think it's art, I think there's something wrong.
OH OK so a HEART SURGEON can't use your NUBER ONE definition of "the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, "

Just how do you think the first surgeon learned to do what he did? I would think application of human creative skill and imagination.


I hope you're never in a position where a "creative solution" is needed for the sake of your health. You may run into one of those guys who are "just skilled".

I wouldn't call him an artist. But if that's the case then I suppose a recording engineer is only skilled too. (No matter how creative he is in his work).
Old 18th September 2007
  #221
Gear Guru
 
henryrobinett's Avatar
I don't know man. Do you know what art is? I mean it seems like such a basic thing. Art is poerty, novels, music, oil painting, water painting, theater, writing songs, performing songs, dance, . . . not heart surgery.

The first person who did heart surgery or discovered the process had a fantastic creative explosion. That was NOT art. It WAS very creative, but it was not art.
Old 18th September 2007
  #222
Gear Guru
 
henryrobinett's Avatar
NSSLY - I think you're holding on to something I'm not saying. I've said it before - creativity is not necessarily artistic creativity. Creativity is used by everyone, sometimes every day. Sometimes there are great, brilliant flashes of creativity that is NOT art. They are not necessarily synonymous.

I am NOT putting down heart surgeons.

Now if you're having a problem with my arrogance, well yes. I am arrogant. I don't mean to be, but I guess I am. I've been accused of that before and I can own that. It pushes people buttons. Sorry. But you know, all the great artists I've known and admired were arrogant as hell. And I loved the fuk out of them.
Old 18th September 2007
  #223
Quote:
Originally Posted by ascottk View Post
You didn't look up skill, did you?
http://encarta.msn.com/dictionary_/skill.html


Talent:


Talent vs. Skill:
http://civpro.blogs.com/civil_proced...vs_talent.html


http://christacy.blogspot.com/2006/1...-vs-skill.html


You're not doing your research. Talent does not require knowledge or discipline. Skill needs both.

She's not improvising, that's more like sight reading. She's reading your fingers.

They have talents, but not in music. They will improve if they had the knowledge and discipline.
But my fingers weren't actually showing any real representation of music.


We're arguing nature vs nurture with where art comes from. Nurture has a far bigger effect than nature. In fact "nuture" probably destroys more artists than it creates.
Old 18th September 2007
  #224
Quote:
Originally Posted by henryrobinett View Post
Heart surgeons? Artists? No. Skill? Yes.

I think we're using different defintions of the word. Yes, sometimes the word "art" is used to convey the idea of skill. The "art" of motorcycle driving. This is not the defintion of art I'm referring to.

ART - 1. the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.

2 ( the arts) the various branches of creative activity, such as painting, music, literature, and dance : the visual arts | [in sing. ] the art of photography.

3 ( arts) subjects of study primarily concerned with the processes and products of human creativity and social life, such as languages, literature, and history (as contrasted with scientific or technical subjects) : the belief that the arts and sciences were incompatible | the Faculty of Arts.

This is not as in Def #4 a skill at doing a specified thing, typically one acquired through practice : the art of conversation.

I don't believe art belongs to musicians, or anybody. Painters, sculptures, writers, directors, dancers as well as those who appreciate it. But no matter how skillful one is, a lawyer is NOT an artist, per definitons 1, 2 and 3. 4 is a whole 'nuther definition.

I don't need to know the whole history of marketing to know that marketing is not art, per def 1, 2,and 3. It applies to #4, but I'm not talkng about #4. Marketing IS or at least CAN BE creative. But it is not art. If you think it's art, I think there's something wrong.
No one is saying that marketing is art, but there certinaly can be an art to it.

I would be most hear surgeons don't ever create art within surgery, but I guarantee you some do. Surger can also be a performance.

What about a plastic surgeon with a human as a canvas. Can you see that as an art?

What about a city planner?

What about Dna flavin's art installations at the Chinati Foundation? I think they're undisputedly art, but the are so mechancical in thie realizations that they could be compared to a McDonald's hamburger.
Old 18th September 2007
  #225
Quote:
Originally Posted by no ssl yet View Post
OH OK so a HEART SURGEON can't use your NUBER ONE definition of "the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, "

Just how do you think the first surgeon learned to do what he did? I would think application of human creative skill and imagination.


I hope you're never in a position where a "creative solution" is needed for the sake of your health. You may run into one of those guys who are "just skilled".

I wouldn't call him an artist. But if that's the case then I suppose a recording engineer is only skilled too. (No matter how creative he is in his work).
Skill? How did he have skill at something he'd never done before?

The first surgery may have started with a plan (song structure), and even if it did happen to exactly as plan, it was still an improv.
Old 18th September 2007
  #226
Quote:
Originally Posted by henryrobinett View Post
I don't know man. Do you know what art is? I mean it seems like such a basic thing. Art is poerty, novels, music, oil painting, water painting, theater, writing songs, performing songs, dance, . . . not heart surgery.

The first person who did heart surgery or discovered the process had a fantastic creative explosion. That was NOT art. It WAS very creative, but it was not art.
You're just being narrow minded about it. Why don't you want to see heart surgery as an art?

There is an element of choice in the point of view. Calling a particular garbage clooector an artist at what he does is not doing to diminsh Picasso or any of his works. the are what they are, so I cna't see any reason to not be more inclusve in the definition. even taken to the extreme and calling everyone and eveything art.


On the other hand, viewing everyone as a potential artsti (becuase not eveyone lives up to their potential) and the result of their creativity as art whether it's a tangible thing or not can be a very valuable learning experience about one's self, the world and the people in it.

Spend some time looking around for the art that doesn't fit your definition. It may take years for you to see it, but it's there.
Old 18th September 2007
  #227
Gear Nut
 
NeilTDeal's Avatar
 

In my day job I work as an I&C Engineer and as a result I work with Architects and engineers of many disciplines. On the whole most engineers are about as far from artists as one can be. They know only what has been done before and their designs are various combinations of other's ideas. While there is still "creativity" in the selection and integration of these unoriginal ideas I have to agree with Henry that this is not art. However, every once in a while I work with an engineer who is in my eyes an artist. These individuals have a vision that goes beyond science, beyond the known. They can for instance mentally visualize how some complex fluid will act inside a pipe and devise a very simple yet unique component to specifically affect that flow. This is not something we put on the wall and admire but IMO it comes from the same place. I think we define art way too narrowly if a poorly painted watercolor qualifies (which it should, after all bad art is still art) and a Burt Ratan original aircraft doesn't.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Caffrey View Post
What about a plastic surgeon with a human as a canvas. Can you see that as an art?
This is a great. If the Plastic Surgeon, why not the Heart Surgeon? Just because we can't see (or wish never to see) his work?
Old 18th September 2007
  #228
no ssl yet
Guest
The point I'm trying to convey is that outside of what we humans consider "the arts" there are human beings that rise beyond the "skill" of their chosen professions to do something that is truly "artistic" to further the boundaries of that profession.

Would I consider heart surgery an art? NO not normally, not in the traditional sense, but I'm sure there have been great surgeons who made an art of it.

Same with MJ and a basketball. Same with some marketers (that's how this convo came up.)
It can be argued that this applies to Henry's #4 only, as in the "art of conversation", but I think it's too narrow to define those most creative souls in different fields..

This started when Henry said "Yes, there is creativeness in all things, but I'm not going to cheapen the wrd ART by saying garbage men and business men are artists. There is a skill and a craft, but as defined as an aesthetic visionary who creates works of art that affect many through illumination and beauty, that counteracts or copies nature, that imprints mankind with emotional and intelligent imagination, no. That is not the purview of the garbage man or the record exec. The marketing man, in this case, is there to help facilitate the artist and his/their pocketbooks, or to take advantage of and provide the public with dissemination of this art. "

As I think about it Henry I have to ask would you consider MLK an artist? Now if you say no, think about his "I have a dream speech" and tell me he wasn't an aesthetic visionary who created a work of art "speech" that affected many through illumination and beauty that counteracted nature, and imprinted mankind with emotional and intelligent imagination.

LOL I'll drop it. When you say "art" I know what you mean. I just consider some others artists because the depth of creativity they bring to their chosen fields shouldn't IMO be limited by the word "skill" which is used to describe everyone else in that field.

I think I reacted to your original notion of not wanting to "cheapen" the word art.
My bad.
Old 18th September 2007
  #229
Lives for gear
 
Empire Prod's Avatar
 

ART

art1 /ɑrt/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ahrt] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun 1. the quality, production, expression, or realm, according to aesthetic principles, of what is beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance.
2. the class of objects subject to aesthetic criteria; works of art collectively, as paintings, sculptures, or drawings: a museum of art; an art collection.
3. a field, genre, or category of art: Dance is an art.
4. the fine arts collectively, often excluding architecture: art and architecture.
5. any field using the skills or techniques of art: advertising art; industrial art.
6. (in printed matter) illustrative or decorative material: Is there any art with the copy for this story?
7. the principles or methods governing any craft or branch of learning: the art of baking; the art of selling.
8. the craft or trade using these principles or methods.
9. skill in conducting any human activity: a master at the art of conversation.
10. a branch of learning or university study, esp. one of the fine arts or the humanities, as music, philosophy, or literature.
11. arts, a. (used with a singular verb) the humanities: a college of arts and sciences.
b. (used with a plural verb) liberal arts.

12. skilled workmanship, execution, or agency, as distinguished from nature.
13. trickery; cunning: glib and devious art.
14. studied action; artificiality in behavior.
15. an artifice or artful device: the innumerable arts and wiles of politics.
16. Archaic. science, learning, or scholarship


By definition
Old 18th September 2007
  #230
Gear Guru
 
henryrobinett's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Caffrey View Post
No one is saying that marketing is art, but there certinaly can be an art to it.
There can be great SKILL, as in def #4 in my above definitions. In THAT sense, yes, there can be an art to it. But we've been discussing the other definitions of art. And no, in terms of a creative, aesthetic enterprise that creates WORKS fit for some kind of exchange; that communicates to an audience, large or small, like dance, music, literature, painting, poetry, etc. No, a marketing guy, no matter HOW skillful, deft, brilliant with strategy, like an army general, is not an artist. He's a phenomenal craftsman. A brilliant strategist. But not an ARTIST, in the sense of creative imagination producing works for aesthetic consumption.

Quote:
I would be most hear surgeons don't ever create art within surgery, but I guarantee you some do. Surger can also be a performance.
Don't think so, unless there's an audience there and he/she's singing and dancing.

Quote:
What about a plastic surgeon with a human as a canvas. Can you see that as an art?
Reconstruction or improving, making younger, taking away wrinkles or trying to carve beauty? No, not art. But who knows? Maybe someone HAS come along that just creates what he wants to out of a face. I see him doing a job for a client who wants to improve his or her looks.

Quote:
What about a city planner?
Mostly no, but could be. Architects definitely have artistic potential. Many like Frank Lloyd Wright defnintely are.

Quote:
What about Dna flavin's art installations at the Chinati Foundation? I think they're undisputedly art, but the are so mechancical in thie realizations that they could be compared to a McDonald's hamburger.
I'm not familiar with his work, but I assume it's art/artistic since they're "art Installations."
Old 18th September 2007
  #231
16942
Guest
Art is in the eyes and ears of tthe beholder. Craft is quantifiable.

We live in an era where art is over-valued (as everybody who creates something considers themselves an artist) and craft is under-valued as many are too lazy to take the time and effort to develop it.

IMHO, of course.
Old 18th September 2007
  #232
Gear Guru
 
henryrobinett's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike Caffrey View Post
You're just being narrow minded about it. Why don't you want to see heart surgery as an art?

There is an element of choice in the point of view. Calling a particular garbage clooector an artist at what he does is not doing to diminsh Picasso or any of his works. the are what they are, so I cna't see any reason to not be more inclusve in the definition. even taken to the extreme and calling everyone and eveything art.


On the other hand, viewing everyone as a potential artsti (becuase not eveyone lives up to their potential) and the result of their creativity as art whether it's a tangible thing or not can be a very valuable learning experience about one's self, the world and the people in it.

Spend some time looking around for the art that doesn't fit your definition. It may take years for you to see it, but it's there.
It's not MY definitions. It's THE definition. I spend a lot of time looking up to understand the definition of words so I'll know what I'm reading and know what I'm talking about. It's not MY narrow definition of ART; it THE narrow definition of art. I didn't invent the word. I didn't use MY own speciliazed definition for it. I looked it up. You don't see, in the dictionary, after they define the word and give examples of art so the reader will understand, them giving examples such as "heart surgeon." No they give examples such as dance, music, painting, literature. That's art. Not "shoe repair." But CAN a shoe repairman have artistic vision and sensibility? You betcha. He can paint it all kinds of colors and glue sprinkles on it. But REPAIRING a shoe is a craft, not an art, excepting def #4. Even if he took a badly damaged shoe and used unbelieveable skill.

I'm not putting people down when I say they aren't artists. Not everyone has to be an artist and being an artist isn't necesssarily a noble and fantastic thing. I could be insulting someone by calling them an artist. Artists certainly don't make a lot of money, for the overwhelmingly most part, and are not generally regarded highly in society. So I don't know where this thing is coming from, this idea that I'm insulting a garbage collector because I don't call him an artist.

OTOH I DO think many people are artistic. I think many conversations are artistic. Certainly creative. I've known people I consider artists, who've never considered themselves as such. My wife makes these fantastic desserts. They are artistic creations. She's also a marketing director for a publishing company (I do know something of the subject). She has crazy skills in that area. Has 35 people under her leadership. She's not an artist there though. She's an executive.
Old 18th September 2007
  #233
Gear Guru
 
henryrobinett's Avatar
I have to add something here that I think is germane. No where in most of the definitions of art I've read, have I read anything about it being GREAT. I think many folk have a misconception that the word "art" signifies some kind of greatness or significance. A lame watercolor is art, but it's still a lame watercolor. But somewhere along the line a lot of people got the idea that a work of ART has to be this great thing and an ARTIST was this great thing. Maybe this is adding to some confusion, at least to how I am being perceived. I do NOT think this. Art is merely art. It's not necessarily some great thing. Some horrible, mindless drivel is also art. Now there's good art and bad art and great art.

Now there is some "art" which is also 95% commerce, which cheapens it's effect as a work of art, for me personally. In other words, if art is something which is expressive of the artist, and it doesn't HAVE to be, but if it is and the artist is only trying to make something that makes him a lot of money, well for me this cheapens the experience of the art. I want to see/hear something emanating from the persons soul, honestly.
Old 18th September 2007
  #234
Gear Guru
 
henryrobinett's Avatar
Quote:
Originally Posted by no ssl yet View Post
As I think about it Henry I have to ask would you consider MLK an artist? Now if you say no, think about his "I have a dream speech" and tell me he wasn't an aesthetic visionary who created a work of art "speech" that affected many through illumination and beauty that counteracted nature, and imprinted mankind with emotional and intelligent imagination.

LOL I'll drop it. When you say "art" I know what you mean. I just consider some others artists because the depth of creativity they bring to their chosen fields shouldn't IMO be limited by the word "skill" which is used to describe everyone else in that field.

I think I reacted to your original notion of not wanting to "cheapen" the word art.
My bad.
You know, of course per definition I would not consider MLK an artist, but he certainly could be. The artistic WORK, the canvas would be, perhaps, mankind. I think oratory, particularly an old form long winded oratory that has long since vansihed, was arguably a form of art.

I can see how the word "cheapen" might have set you off. I didn't mean to be offensive. I just think there are different types and qualities of communiation. And I think art is, generally, a different quality of communication which lies in a different field altogether from businessmen and garbage collectors.
Old 18th September 2007
  #235
Gear Nut
 
NeilTDeal's Avatar
 

Getting back to the original thread's question, I personally have very mixed emotions on this topic. My time attending a School of music gave me the ability to communicate musically and it forced me to focus on honing my craft. But when it came to singing, there was a homogenized vision of what a "voice" should sound like. It broke my heart to hear a friend's sultry silky alto forcibly molded into an operatic contralto that sounded like a barking cow!

I came to believe that the system was very effective at getting mediocre singers to meet the standard "voice" concept but at the expense of the truly talented. I know that this is not what all schools of music are about but since with many Jazz still remains the bastard son, I doubt my experience was at all unique.
Old 18th September 2007
  #236
no ssl yet
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by henryrobinett View Post
It's not MY definitions. It's THE definition. I spend a lot of time looking up to understand the definition of words so I'll know what I'm reading and know what I'm talking about. It's not MY narrow definition of ART; it THE narrow definition of art. I didn't invent the word. I didn't use MY own speciliazed definition for it. I looked it up. You don't see, in the dictionary, after they define the word and give examples of art so the reader will understand, them giving examples such as "heart surgeon." No they give examples such as dance, music, painting, literature. That's art. Not "shoe repair." But CAN a shoe repairman have artistic vision and sensibility? You betcha. He can paint it all kinds of colors and glue sprinkles on it. But REPAIRING a shoe is a craft, not an art, excepting def #4. Even if he took a badly damaged shoe and used unbelieveable skill.

I'm not putting people down when I say they aren't artists. Not everyone has to be an artist and being an artist isn't necesssarily a noble and fantastic thing. I could be insulting someone by calling them an artist. Artists certainly don't make a lot of money, for the overwhelmingly most part, and are not generally regarded highly in society. So I don't know where this thing is coming from, this idea that I'm insulting a garbage collector because I don't call him an artist.

OTOH I DO think many people are artistic. I think many conversations are artistic. Certainly creative. I've known people I consider artists, who've never considered themselves as such. My wife makes these fantastic desserts. They are artistic creations. She's also a marketing director for a publishing company (I do know something of the subject). She has crazy skills in that area. Has 35 people under her leadership. She's not an artist there though. She's an executive.
You are being narrow minded. You just said it doesn't fit any other definition EXCEPT # 4, but you're not using it as in #4.

Man it's like debating the drug/pharm industry with you. You have your understanding, but it doesn't make it THE understanding.


We can't say that someone designing a building is not an artist. (I think it would truly depend on the building.)

Again I think there are fields that don't call for one being an "artist", however there are some who rise above the others in their field and truly make an ART of what they do.

This is rare. It falls outside of the "arts" but it doesn't make that person less of an artist.
Old 18th September 2007
  #237
Gear Guru
 
henryrobinett's Avatar
What????? I said architects are artists, certainly in Frank Lloyd Wright case, those type architects. I agreed that many who design buildnigs are artists! What are you saying?

All I'm saying is defining the word. If you want to add other definitons of your own invention, be my guest. If I misunderstand the definitons please tell me where I don't understand the WORD.

In most cases I add that this is my opinion. The pharm/drug thing falls into "opinions" territory. This is definied clearly in any dictionary. It needs no opinion.
Old 18th September 2007
  #238
no ssl yet
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by henryrobinett View Post
What????? I said architects are artists, certainly in Frank Lloyd Wright case, those type architects. I agreed that many who design buildnigs are artists! What are you saying?

All I'm saying is defining the word. If you want to add other definitons of your own invention, be my guest. If I misunderstand the definitons please tell me where I don't understand the WORD.

In most cases I add that this is my opinion. The pharm/drug thing falls into "opinions" territory. This is definied clearly in any dictionary. It needs no opinion.
LOL I missed where you said architects were artists (That's what I get for skimming)

My bad, We're cool.thumbsup

(I still think speeches (sometimes) fall under art. In much the same way as poetry/prose. But I see your point.).
Old 18th September 2007
  #239
Gear Guru
 
henryrobinett's Avatar
LOL! I keep thinking we're cool and then all of a sudden we're not cool all over again. Man.
Old 18th September 2007
  #240
no ssl yet
Guest
Quote:
Originally Posted by henryrobinett View Post
LOL! I keep thinking we're cool and then all of a sudden we're not cool all over again. Man.
Hey I had a long day, I have a right to 1/2 read a bit.

(Yep I have a right to be wrongheh)
Post Reply

Welcome to the Gearslutz Pro Audio Community!

Registration benefits include:
  • The ability to reply to and create new discussions
  • Access to members-only giveaways & competitions
  • Interact with VIP industry experts in our guest Q&As
  • Access to members-only sub forum discussions
  • Access to members-only Chat Room
  • Get INSTANT ACCESS to the world's best private pro audio Classifieds for only USD $20/year
  • Promote your eBay auctions and Reverb.com listings for free
  • Remove this message!
You need an account to post a reply. Create a username and password below and an account will be created and your post entered.


 
 
Slide to join now Processing…
Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Similar Threads
Thread
Thread Starter / Forum
Replies
quietdrive / So much gear, so little time
1
TML / Bruce Swedien
2
Nik / So much gear, so little time
29
Renie / So much gear, so little time
27

Forum Jump
Forum Jump