I am extremely appalled by the reality of this article (http://tpt.to/a4km934), Where The Onion talks about a National Endowment For The Arts in the US has forked out 80 million to buy off people that they deem atrocious in various fields of art, so that they can boost the overall level of arts in the country.
This makes me think about the type of people out there who could actually do this someday. And it’s ridiculous! Who’s to say that a piece of artwork is good or bad? Dyou really think that money is what an artist is looking for? Someone who goes into arts could also be venturing into it because it is a form of expression. Or because they love to do it. And the very fact that art itself is subjective and open to interpretation makes this weaning of apparently talentless amateurs a poor move for the organisation. Is reputation and money making all that some people care about? I know this isn’t actually real anymore. But I am sure that this resonates with a good number of people in society, even artists themselves. Shouldn’t an organisation like this be funding such artists BECAUSE they want them to keep at it and get better if they are passionate about it, instead of paying them off to never do another piece of art again?
Many people who are deemed as having lousy work are actually not as “unacceptable” as they seem to be. if they are doing it because they love it, fine. Remember that it’s a free country and they can be as expressive as they want. And that there are many more artists, musicians, photographers, etc that we can choose to appreciate in place of insulting others. How would you like it if someone was insulting you?. Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder.
there are people I know that have a similar blatant use of language and unapologetic attitude towards people they have labelled as lousy. What about the great and famous works of art that some people deem as noise or chaotic and think it’s just one big mess? Or those well renowned artists with kiddy-like drawings that have earned favour from many because of its simplicity? Will such people waltz over and try to pay them off because they see such work as only as good as a 10 year old’s? Who gave these people the deciding veto power to label what is beautiful and what is not?
Imagine what you are doing to aspiring generations of artists. How your own children will see their own artwork and how it may not ever be good enough. How people who are extremely talented or gifted could be shot down just because one small body of people labels them as useless and counterproductive. Or if they never dare to show their works to the world, to touch and change people, just because they are fearful that they fall into such a category.
Such implementations are revealing about people who think this way that are too ignorant to realise that it often brings about anger and irreversible damage, not only to others but to themselves.
to me, anything can turn into art depending on the person viewing it. Just because 1 person out of 100 thinks it looks like garbage, or 30, or 99, to the person who drew or painted or took a photograph of it, it could still have been from a creative place and could have had a story behind it. And that’s all you really need. To find meaning in the most unassuming of pieces is what I call a true appreciator of art. Don’t be so quick to judge and dismiss things you cannot fully understand or appreciate.