Sort:  
  • Trending
    • [-]
     last year 

    I am an artist, and if I am asked a question about what I drew there, then I do not want to answer anything, because the viewer who asked such a question is not yet ready to perceive what I said through lines and colors. I'll wait for my viewer or I don't need him at all, but I won't explain to anyone. With photography, everything is somewhat different, because photography is realistic in any way, but if I create an abstract or some other image from realistic, then it also does not require any explanation and will tell something only to the viewer who is ready to perceive it.

    [-]
     last year (edited)

    This is your opinion - and mine too!
    But our opinion does not simply allow to generalize like

    creativity does not require any explanations, it speaks for itself.

    1. I can give the viewers hints within and outside my picture.
    2. I would never deny the questions of a little child - so why should I deny questions of "grown up childs"?
    3. It is not the same to speak about and to explain a single work - or to speak and to reflect on creativity.
    4. Creativity may for some reasons not be teachable, but it is explainable to the gifted.
    5. Many of the thoughts I have while creating a poem or a photo can be uttered. Some not.

    So, we could keep the common place formula - or we could leave it. I for my own part decided to leave it. The main reason for my decision was nothing from the above sketched arguments, but the communicative experience: that those who use the formula in most cases misuse it for hiding their thoughts and skills behind some mystery.

    $0.00
      Reply
      [-]
       last year (edited)

      It seems to me that the main thing depends on the purpose of the "creator".:

      1. the author's desire to be heard and understood with willingness to explain everything to everyone and thereby gain popularity and earnings;
      2. meet one who understands.
      3. Creativity as "breathing" (example - Yayoi Kusama).

      2-3 become a field for the work of art critics, and the success of artists depends only on them.

      [-]
       last year 

      Zuerst - ich bin ein Klugscheißer. Ich kann es nicht ändern, fürchte ich.
      Zweitens - ich diskutierte mal mit einem Bekannten darüber, was Kunst ist. Als er sagte: Kunst ist das, was der Kunstmarkt als Kunst betrachtet - brach ich das Gespräch ab.
      Drittens - ich kann kreativ sein und darüber reden, ich kann aber selbst bei eigenen Werken nicht immer erklären, warum es so ist, wie es ist. Das ist normal. Daraus folgere ich aber kein allgemeines Gesetz. Ich entdecke (!) von Fall zu Fall, was erklärbar ist. Kreativität und Kunst sind geheimnisvoll, aber keine übersinnlichen Mysterien.

      First - I'm a smart ass. I can't change it, I'm afraid.
      Second - I once had a discussion with an acquaintance about what art is. When he said: art is what the art market considers art - I broke off the conversation.
      Third - I can be creative and talk about it, but I can't always explain why it is the way it is, even with my own work. That is normal. But I don't conclude a general law from that. I discover (!) from case to case what can be explained. Creativity and art are mysterious, but not supernatural mysteries.

      $0.00
        Reply

        Coin Marketplace

        STEEM 0.18
        TRX 0.16
        JST 0.029
        BTC 62555.95
        ETH 2435.55
        USDT 1.00
        SBD 2.64