AMV artist / AMV Creator

godix · Post by **godix** » Sat Jul 02, 2005 1:19 am

One more definition

Pretentious Wanker: Anyone who spends time and effort trying to show that what they do is art and what other people do is crap.

Honestly, there's nothing wrong with saying "I don't like the flashy shit" without trying to categorize people who make it as not being a true artist. I mean honestly, what's next? Are you going to wear a beret, get a mac, and sit in a coffee house arguing over exactly when Trent Reznor crossed the line between cutting edge underground artist and cheap commercial whore?

Incidently, the definition of 'art' I've found that works best and avoids bullshit arguments: If there isn't a practical use for it then it's art. Doesn't matter if it's a four year old drawing on a wall, Michelangelo painting the Sistine Chapel, or some loser putting Naruto, heavy metal, and more flashing than Mardi Gras together. It's all art, it just isn't all good art.

megaman917 · Post by **megaman917** » Sat Jul 02, 2005 1:42 am

I have to agree with both Beowulf and Otohiko on this one. Regardless of how one looks at it, art imitates life (and sometimes art imitates other art which imitates life). So whether it's a painting, drawing, sculpture, poem, novel, cartoon, anime, AMV, etc., etc., etc., in some way shape or form it imitates real life.[/code]

Nightowl · Post by **Nightowl** » Sat Jul 02, 2005 3:33 am

Okay. The 'What is Art?' argument has been around for thousands of years (YES, thousands) and it has never been properly answered because there IS NO RIGHT ANSWER. That's one of the great things about art. Think you're an artist? Good for you. The question is usually answered in the same way that if you attack someone on the internet and they don't have an intelligent response, they say, "DUDE, that's MY opinion. Everyone can have a different opinion. Dude." It's a trick fucking question art theorists ask people in order to assess their own creative ideology and style.

I, personally, like to use different parts of myself when being creative. Where I got information that has been fed into that part, doesn't matter. As a species we assimilate, that's what we're designed to do. We also like to output the different things we've learned and patched together, thereby possibly teaching future generations. It's instinctual. And don't use drugs to support your creativity. It isn't fucking worth it. All in all, Burroughs was not that great a man.

And I have a Mac.

Fuckers.

-N

jbone · Post by **jbone** » Sat Jul 02, 2005 9:23 am

x_rex30 wrote:My friend thinks the same thing(as well do I), and he's got a job from Don Bluth. I would say my friend knows quite a bit about artistic creativity since he is both an animator and musician

You don't need to know anything "artistic" to be an animator or a musician. Creativity is needed, sure, but not art.

The one doesn't imply or require the other.

godix wrote:Pretentious Wanker: Anyone who spends time and effort trying to show that what they do is art and what other people do is crap.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

Voices_Of_Ryan · Post by **Voices_Of_Ryan** » Sat Jul 02, 2005 9:32 am

I've been wondering how many people actually care if this is art and if it isn't. I think the people that get the majority of the "fun" (or entertainment) out of this hobby are those who've just either never started caring, or are bran new people coming with no understanding of how this could possibly be anything more than us wasting our time to give everyone some entertainment.

Does anyone ask if Family guy is art?
Not paticularly... Sure it's animation. Sure it's got great songs.

But no one cares because it's entertaining.
I think when you try and boil down the basic idea's of what we're doing.
It becomes that much less fun.

x_rex30 · Post by **x_rex30** » Sat Jul 02, 2005 9:50 am

jbone wrote:
x_rex30 wrote:My friend thinks the same thing(as well do I), and he's got a job from Don Bluth. I would say my friend knows quite a bit about artistic creativity since he is both an animator and musician
You don't need to know anything "artistic" to be an animator or a musician. Creativity is needed, sure, but not art.

The one doesn't imply or require the other.

I don't know what exactly what your trying to counter argue?? Of course you don't need to know anything artistic(I guess) to do those things, but him being a writer, artist, and musician points to a higher possibility for him being quite the artistic individual, and just to say you DON'T NEED TO KNOW is kinda stupid thing to say since most likely my friend is artistic. Also I think Nightowl has made the best points so far in this discussion.

jbone · Post by **jbone** » Sat Jul 02, 2005 9:55 am

x_rex30 wrote:I don't know what exactly what your trying to counter argue?? Of course you don't need to know anything artistic(I guess) to do those things, but him being a writer, artist, and musician points to a higher possibility for him being quite the artistic individual, and just to say you DON'T NEED TO KNOW is kinda stupid thing to say since most likely my friend is artistic. Also I think Nightowl has made the best points so far in this discussion.

I was correcting your logical argument.

And employment in a creative field doesn't necessarily increase the likelihood of a person being artistic.

And Nightowl has made the best points so far because, unlike the other people in this thread, he is an artist.

x_rex30 · Post by **x_rex30** » Sat Jul 02, 2005 10:09 am

jbone wrote:I was correcting your logical argument.

LOL. What about your logical argument.

I say the guy gets hired by Don Bluth witch is the creator of The Secret of NIMH, and also wrote the script for all dogs go to heaven, and is also asking for my friends help with the producing of a film, and you'r trying to counter argue with me about him being an ARTIST!! Your being quite a hypocrite by trying to correct my logical argument, when your logical reasoning seems way out of place, and shows signs of you being quite the arrogant individual.

jbone · Post by **jbone** » Sat Jul 02, 2005 10:20 am

x_rex30 wrote:
jbone wrote:I was correcting your logical argument.
LOL. What about your logical argument. I say the guy gets hired by Don Bluth witch is the creator of The Secret of NIMH, and also wrote the script for all dogs go to heaven, and is also asking for my friends help with the producing of a film, and you'r trying to counter argue with me about him being an ARTIST!! Your being quite a hypocrite by trying to correct my logical argument, when your logical reasoning seems way out of place, and shows signs of you being quite the arrogant individual.

Logically, an individual doesn't need to be an artist to work in a creative capacity. It doens't matter who your friend works for, that doesn't automatically make him an artist.

There is no flaw in my logical argument. Read up on what logic is and how to use it, and then respond. You're beginning to now insult me rather than acknowledge logic, making your argued point invalid and causing your statements to be rather irrelevent.

Org Profile · Post by **Otohiko** » Sat Jul 02, 2005 10:24 am

I think it's also naive to think that art is purely something that has to do with the artist. If you ask me, it has to do as much, and likely more, with the audience. I think that, try as you might, you won't convince an uninterested audience with whatever pretentious wanking you throw at them. And I could use many examples where an audience with different expectations than me assessed the artistic value of something completely different from how I would assess it (case in point: note the general reactions to music I requested on AMV radio to date).