Shower-time Train of Thought

Who is the better artist?
The artist whose work is simple, accessible, direct? The artist who is loved by the masses?
Or the artist whose work is vague, ambiguous, complex, convoluted? The artist who is loved by other artists?
Both have their own merits, both have positives and negatives, but which one is best?
I suppose that it all comes down to personal values.
But if so many more people value the simple, then does that make it better? Majority rule?
And yet, if the artists are considered elite, if those who are valued by the masses value the complex, then does that make the complex better? Hierarchical/structural valuation?

Tags: ,

21 Responses to “Shower-time Train of Thought”

  1. odark says:

    Well guided, self-critiqued, self-motivated, and focused on the goals at hand. Matters not what the people think in the long run, look at the artists priorly written onto parchment to be remembered forever. Most were hated and cast out by society. In translation two forms of people exist in today’s standards that could be the next great artist. Is it the Frat boy and his alcohol, or the geek and his quiet nature? Point is everyone is the great artist of their own world. One’s ability to reference their thoughts and manifest them physically is what makes them great in other’s eyes. Fact is that anyone who inflicts change through creation is an artist. It could be complex, it could be simple, that is up the artist.

  2. ligu_gwaine says:

    The better artist is one who makes sacrifices for his/her own work and doesn’t hold back. Whatever opinion, belief, statement they want to convey through their work should be fully displayed by the work of art regardless of anyone who might shun it. This artist must take pride in their work. Also, it helps to be obsessed with the love of creation.

    My personal preference: Aesthetically, a simple line and a splotch of paint doesn’t quite do it for me as a viewer of art. The more fucked up, the better, I say.

    • ligu_gwaine says:

      For some reason, I applied the artist question to just visual art.

      So, to clarify, the first paragraph can apply to any type of artist.
      The preference following said paragraph can be ignored.

  3. Simplicity, simplicity, simplicity.

    • ligu_gwaine says:

      Even for a musical artist?

      That sounds very very boring.

      120 beats per minute in 4/4 time. And pump up the Goddamned hand claps.

      Psssh, no thanks.

      • Simplicity doesn’t necessarily imply repetition or even a prudent construct. It points more toward the insignificant as being significant.

        • ligu_gwaine says:

          I’m not talking about repetition, or even a prudent construct.

          To me, something that’s too simple…
          just kinda lacks that “pushing art to its edge” type quality.
          It seems a bit too mundane.

  4. mystisk66 says:

    I believe it is the artist who loves their creation…every creation…as though it were a child..that is truly the best artist.

    Being an artist is not meant for the achievement of accolades and awards. It’s a deep longing that is formed in the mind and shaped into something solid..or put into verse or song.

    I think that every thought and every color and every whispered song or written word is a thing of beauty because it is the formation of an individuals feelings.

    We are all great artists at times….

  5. I am writing a whole paper attacking Top 40 radio for being too general, boring musically and lyrically, and being trite and overplayed. Hoobastank’s “The Reason,” which was given a Grammy nod is the main thing I’m focusing on because it’s the biggest piece of shit to hit the airwaves since Der Fuhrer’s speeches, in fact I consider it even worse!

  6. the_eek says:

    It is all relative to individual preference. Each of us has our own idea of what is good despite whether it deters from the norm or not.

  7. strikeonbox says:

    mark rothko is the better artist.

  8. slope_tart says:

    I am currently talking Soca/Anth 257, “The Art of Primitive Peoples,” and we devoted the first two weeks or so to discussing what qualifies as art. Professor Rice asked us if we thought “The Gates” by Jean-Claude Christo that were displayed in Central Park were art. I mean, they’re just a bunch of bright orange flags attached to poles, but it’s something to think about. Anyway, I have found this class to be really intriguing, and I would suggest you take this class (we’ve studied cave art and North West Coast art and it’s actually really interesting) but you’re graduating. :-/

  9. The artist who doesn’t give a shit. Some great artists have gotten great acclaim in their day, and some of the best artists perhaps were never even discovered. Regardless, it’s the artist who doesn’t give a shit what other people think that usually is better. Of course, talent is usually pretty important too. =P

    As a side note, it’s surprising how many everyday things can be considered art. Almost everything.

    • odark says:

      I always thought of people who saw everything as art as “born again” hippies. ::shakey hand points to a tree:: Woah man it’s beautiful, look at all that brown! Sometimes it can be confused with actually having an artistic eye. They could have also lead a dreadfully boring and cumbersome life before this revelation. Art is always subject to opinion and perception, what one guy calls art I throw molotavs at.

  10. proverbdoll says:

    musically….i demand more cowbell!

    (ok i’m done…I actually appreciate a wide variety of artistic styles and really can’t tell you why)