What is This?

look folks, I am an art teacher, and I tell my students, if you post it, display it, it is open game to good and bad comments. That is life as an artist. Saying something is bad is not bullying, not inappropriate, or mean. When you make art you know it will be loved/hated and in between. If you get consumed with what people say about it, you won;t be an artist for long. There are many people who said Picasso was shit, Pollock was a fraud, Kandinsky was mentally unfit, and you know what they didn't listen to the haters. If Picasso did he would have stopped at his 500th work of art, instead he kept plugging away to his own tune for 10000! So anyone can be critical as long as it is in good taste and not personal. So if you think the painting is shit, you can say it, if you love it you can say it. No one is wrong or right. How many times have people said they don't like songs by PJ or art posters for them? So get off the moral high horse, and understand anyone who wants to be an artist has thick skin and can take whatever is thrown at them. It is not about the person, it is about a painting, and whether you want to argue it is an extension of the artists or not does not matter. When you make it public, critics will criticize. The Sistine Chapel ceiling was considered blasphemous at one point....still there though.

hrd2imgn said:

look folks, I am an art teacher, and I tell my students, if you post it, display it, it is open game to good and bad comments. That is life as an artist. Saying something is bad is not bullying, not inappropriate, or mean. When you make art you know it will be loved/hated and in between. If you get consumed with what people say about it, you won;t be an artist for long. There are many people who said Picasso was shit, Pollock was a fraud, Kandinsky was mentally unfit, and you know what they didn't listen to the haters. If Picasso did he would have stopped at his 500th work of art, instead he kept plugging away to his own tune for 10000! So anyone can be critical as long as it is in good taste and not personal. So if you think the painting is shit, you can say it, if you love it you can say it. No one is wrong or right. How many times have people said they don't like songs by PJ or art posters for them? So get off the moral high horse, and understand anyone who wants to be an artist has thick skin and can take whatever is thrown at them. It is not about the person, it is about a painting, and whether you want to argue it is an extension of the artists or not does not matter. When you make it public, critics will criticize. The Sistine Chapel ceiling was considered blasphemous at one point....still there though.

HughFreakingDillon said:

hrd2imgn said:

look folks, I am an art teacher, and I tell my students, if you post it, display it, it is open game to good and bad comments. That is life as an artist. Saying something is bad is not bullying, not inappropriate, or mean. When you make art you know it will be loved/hated and in between. If you get consumed with what people say about it, you won;t be an artist for long. There are many people who said Picasso was shit, Pollock was a fraud, Kandinsky was mentally unfit, and you know what they didn't listen to the haters. If Picasso did he would have stopped at his 500th work of art, instead he kept plugging away to his own tune for 10000! So anyone can be critical as long as it is in good taste and not personal. So if you think the painting is shit, you can say it, if you love it you can say it. No one is wrong or right. How many times have people said they don't like songs by PJ or art posters for them? So get off the moral high horse, and understand anyone who wants to be an artist has thick skin and can take whatever is thrown at them. It is not about the person, it is about a painting, and whether you want to argue it is an extension of the artists or not does not matter. When you make it public, critics will criticize. The Sistine Chapel ceiling was considered blasphemous at one point....still there though.

i think stating "anyone who wants to be an artist has thick skin" is a ridiculous over generalization.

Maybe "will or needs to develop a thick skin" might be more appropriate, but damn. That post was very well-spoken and thought out.

HughFreakingDillon said:

hrd2imgn said:

look folks, I am an art teacher, and I tell my students, if you post it, display it, it is open game to good and bad comments. That is life as an artist. Saying something is bad is not bullying, not inappropriate, or mean. When you make art you know it will be loved/hated and in between. If you get consumed with what people say about it, you won;t be an artist for long. There are many people who said Picasso was shit, Pollock was a fraud, Kandinsky was mentally unfit, and you know what they didn't listen to the haters. If Picasso did he would have stopped at his 500th work of art, instead he kept plugging away to his own tune for 10000! So anyone can be critical as long as it is in good taste and not personal. So if you think the painting is shit, you can say it, if you love it you can say it. No one is wrong or right. How many times have people said they don't like songs by PJ or art posters for them? So get off the moral high horse, and understand anyone who wants to be an artist has thick skin and can take whatever is thrown at them. It is not about the person, it is about a painting, and whether you want to argue it is an extension of the artists or not does not matter. When you make it public, critics will criticize. The Sistine Chapel ceiling was considered blasphemous at one point....still there though.

i think stating "anyone who wants to be an artist has thick skin" is a ridiculous over generalization.

As an artist, I do get what he's saying. You put it out there. Often, you've married the work that you've created, but you have to understand that other people will view things differently. I offended nearly an entire print class with a product design that I did in college. People who weren't religious were offended and I didn't get it. Why would they care? It wasn't a big deal. The prof thought it was funny. What happened? I got an A on the print and the triptych was accepted to the annual university student show that year.

Just proves that not everyone loved it, but a few people out there did. It now hangs on my living room wall.

hedonist said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

hrd2imgn said:

look folks, I am an art teacher, and I tell my students, if you post it, display it, it is open game to good and bad comments. That is life as an artist. Saying something is bad is not bullying, not inappropriate, or mean. When you make art you know it will be loved/hated and in between. If you get consumed with what people say about it, you won;t be an artist for long. There are many people who said Picasso was shit, Pollock was a fraud, Kandinsky was mentally unfit, and you know what they didn't listen to the haters. If Picasso did he would have stopped at his 500th work of art, instead he kept plugging away to his own tune for 10000! So anyone can be critical as long as it is in good taste and not personal. So if you think the painting is shit, you can say it, if you love it you can say it. No one is wrong or right. How many times have people said they don't like songs by PJ or art posters for them? So get off the moral high horse, and understand anyone who wants to be an artist has thick skin and can take whatever is thrown at them. It is not about the person, it is about a painting, and whether you want to argue it is an extension of the artists or not does not matter. When you make it public, critics will criticize. The Sistine Chapel ceiling was considered blasphemous at one point....still there though.

i think stating "anyone who wants to be an artist has thick skin" is a ridiculous over generalization.

Maybe "will or needs to develop a thick skin" might be more appropriate, but damn. That post was very well-spoken and thought out.

actually, to me, it was just a really long paragraph that basically says what we all know and have agreed upon: art can and will be criticized. the only argument made previous to that, in my mind, was that "was the critique too harsh or was it appropriate?". I found it harsh and immature. some say "have at 'er!". to me, there is also a defined difference between seeing a picture and critiquing it, and taking that image, posting it on the internet somewhere else, and making fun of it. remember someone in school who would see something you drew on paper? if he said to your face 'that's garbage", fine. But if he tore that page out of your book, posted it in the library with "piece of shit" written on it, is that not completely different?

he also argues that there's nothing wrong with saying something is bad. i agree. but mocking it is not critiquing. that is all my point has been this entire time. but people just keep reading what they wish to read. so be it.

and several times in this thread people have said "I'm sick of political correctness". I don't think saying "stop being politically correct" is really valid here. that phrase is thrown around in the incorrect context constantly, this thread included. being politically correct does not mean being nice. it just means not generalizing a group of people and using the wrong word to describe that group. like saying African American instead of black.

what people really mean these days when they say "fuck political correctness" is actually just "I can be a dick if I want to be".

hedonist said:

Dammit, Hugh, you opened up a lot of doors with your post!

First, the OP conceded to a degree and changed the initial post. And even so, god forbid someone mocks! Look at all of the popular talk and comedy shows (Daily Show comes to mind) that does that, and is embraced? If it's wrong, it should be wrong all over regardless of the target.

As to PC-ness, I agree the term is over/misused (much like with "bullying" in this thread alone).

When I say fuck that, I'm not saying it as license to be an asshole. I'm saying it as a means to not tip-toe around certain words or easily-hurt feelings.

Now art, like dickishness - personal and subjective

sparky_fry said:

Separated at birth from Sophie b Hawkins .