It's entirely possible that you're fed up of hearing about the Appit! monthly challenge at iPA...but like the Muses' challenges there's something undefinable about working with someone else's vision. So far all I've worked with are photographs and as I write this it occurs to me that I'd like to play with someting that someone else painted. The place to start with that is where I started at in college I suppose, with some 'art' that's out of copyright. It's an old tradition after all.
So far I've not truly collaborated. I've worked with a photograph taken by somebody else and other artists have used the same photo as their inspiration too and it's fascinating seeing how differently we approach things. Or how similar the results sometimes are.
You get a glimpse of the human condition...how we're socialised...the differences in perspective...how our past artistic habits inlfuence the directions we go in.
Is it a good thing to keep going along the same track? Or follow your instincts? Or push at the barriers? I'm using art as therapy so perhaps the direction I need to go in will be different to someone consumed by their muse...
My musings have reminded me of a conversation I had with a friend recently,
(who wrote this 'Hearing Film'. The cover of which she detests by the way.)
We were lamenting the lack of value that society places upon the arts and humanities. She mentioned an article about Google , which I found here which is a little ray of light,
...but that was in my mind when I read a blog post via Twitter about how mobile photography is making vast numbers of people without artistic talent think they have a creative gift. When clearly they don't. But who says?
Then a little later the same day I read this by Adrian Graham, lamenting how mobile photography is turning everything into a popularity contest and that the boundaries of photography aren't being pushed because of it. Even my fibro brain knows that these things aren't closely connected but it's started me thinking. Or trying to anyway. I've always believed passionately that if education gave the arts equal value in the curriculum that people would have more confidence and more skill at creating. And that the world would be a better and richer place because of it.
I see the tools that technology puts into everyone's hands as a good thing. More people are creating than ever before. If mobile phones and iPhoneography sites encourage people to share tips and skills and develop a means of creative expression then I'm sorry but I can't see that as a bad thing.
Artists have always needed to make the choice - do I create what I feel/want or do I create what sells? Who's to say that 'chocolate box' art that gives some people pleasure isn't valid? Yes there's a lot of dross out there, but then who am I to decide it's dross?
Almost everything is subjective, the arts more than anything require the audience to make a value judgement. I also know that humanity forms groups and that groups make us resistant to change and can foster elitism...but it's a yin/yang thing and I see the benefits balancing out the negatives.
So, yes the internet seems to be making Art a popularity contest, but I for one am getting a lot out of the potential it has opened up for sharing and learning.
I've not attempted to gather my thoughts in writing very often since fibro hit. My brain can't cope very well and it uses a LOT of spoons. If you've stuck with me this far, thank you. I'm not sure it's been worth your time but I at least have created some semblance of order in my head.
No comments:
Post a Comment