View Full Version : What do you think about loss of significance of art forms in today's societies ?
06 June 2005, 02:36 AM
(do not take my opinion and apply it to all art done, I know it doesn't apply)
Personally I think art has lost it's real and powerful value all because of the money people leading it these days.
We see a lot of pictures, paintings, songs and even texts and other art forms that do nothing else but being nice very often. This really sickens me because art is probably the only thing can propagate messages to just about everyone, independant from their social status or beliefs.
Producers, with all their "popular" culture, not in a sense of real popularity but how people name it, is just cutting money to all other emergent, different or indie cultures. I mean, heck, even the name is a lie too. Popular culture is just a culture controlled and thought to make money. It's art without meaning, often very very similar to anything. Conformism is a rule and when you are different to us, we disregard you. This is a very bad way to incult respect and good sense to a society. In movies you get the same formula over and over, same for games, music.
In music the pop culture just takes all the place. Anything that is different will never get any money. You have pop without lyrics at all, empty words without a sense. In rap you get rappers playing gangstas, sayin' they're pimps, saying girls are hos, showing their bling, cars, moneys.. Worst thing is that people get used to it from their very childhood and would never for the most part dare looking at what is done in indie and underground scenes.
In movies you either have that pro-american propaganda or the usual remake, often just killing the movie and adding more FX.
Paintings or general images also get emptied from their meaning. There are a lot of paintings and images that carry ideas or thoughts, but where is the real market for that except a few interested people, (this goes for all medias).
People who do it for the sake of it and want to make people think are very often discouraged to do so. There is no real incentive to take some of your time and do it. It's hard to be distributed. It's hard to get your stuff out there. It takes a lot of time and money to do art, and it's not with disillusionned people working in grocery stores and places like that that it's really gonna evolve.
We don't get masters anymore it seems. When is the last time you heard about a great painter who changes things, a movie who is revolutionnary who had some theater time ? There are some who get merit, but never as much as they should deserve. Art today has become a product. They produce consumable products, not art. And those consumable products are there for the sole purposes of entertaining our feeble minds that they only want to become more feeble and being consumed. Consumed and immediately forgotten. Forget art, the prime value is money and power, nothing else.
Art is sick, how do we cure it ?
06 June 2005, 02:49 AM
Ignoring the money stuff, which I actually partially hate...
Nowadays there are more and more art makers and art viewers than ever, including all arts.
Past art was made for elites, nowadays art is viewed virtualy by anyone, anywhere...
06 June 2005, 04:19 AM
Did you have a question or are you just ranting?
Anyway, you have a right to your opinion but I refuse to adopt your doom and gloom attitude. Commercial and personal art are two different beasts, each appealing to a different audience. Similarly, Top 40 music is quite different from indie music which is different from gangsta rap, etc. In short, pop art and music appeal to the lowest common denominator in order to be appreciated by the greatest number of people. Its goal is to be financially profitable. Popular films take safe concepts and appeal to your emotions moreso than your brains. Popular music doesn't often make you think. It gives you a throbbing beat and simple lyrics that you can sing in your car. And popular art looks good over your living room sofa and makes people think you're smart for having something to say about it.
As far as personalized art, art with a sincere goal of communicating, it is still being produced. You may not see much of it because it wasn't created to be mass marketed. Those who want intelligent lyrics in their songs will go looking for it. Those who appreciate good art will make up their own opinions about what is good. Those who have a message or a different way of looking at things will find a medium to help them express it. With the internet, with street graffiti, with film or whatever, there are so many more ways for an individual to have his message heard than perhaps at any time during history. You just need to learn how to listen.
The kids are alright.
06 June 2005, 06:19 AM
Art will never fade nor will it be defiled. In someways, art has always been used in a way that an artist didn't intend. Traditional art in the past were made up of a lot of commissions for rich people that artists didn't want to do but had to pay the bills.
As long as if there is a soul in each of our bodies, art will never lose its signigicance.
Um, I guess, sometimes we just need to shut our eyes for a few seconds and blot out the mass produced advertisements and mass media and think for ourselves. The real world isn't like what the t.v. or ads proclaim it to be.
06 June 2005, 03:46 PM
I think the massive amounts of people in these forums is good evidence that art is still alive and influential. This generation is keeping art alive and prospering and well through places just like this, more power to everyone out here posting!
06 June 2005, 12:40 AM
i totally agree with you Schwinnz!
the current situation here in my homeland is rather hopeless i think. i'm young, just trying to go tu university. and even now i have to choose. i will do what i have to, even if it kills the artist in me but get the money can buy my food and maybe have family later. but if i choose to remain the artist: it's very uncertain if i can stay alive if you know what i mean;)
the thing is, that i can't ignore the money mosconariz even if i want to do that and hate this sordid world probably as much as you... now everything is about money.
yes more and more people can reach the artworks. but their taste is hardly affected by the "Producers, with all their "popular" culture" as Schwinnz said. and as i see in my country people don't really care about art. they have better things to do. 'yes it's good that we have artist and they are really fine but i dont have the time for them, rather run after the money'. it's really sad indeed.
i know art will never fade. don't mean offense but i think now commercial art is getting more and more barren. i admit it's greatness but it's too plain to mee . more likely to be an artisan's work than an artist's. and really dont want to offend anyone...
one of my teachers used to say our world we live in is decadent. and this whole thing must be changed before art can mean what it meant maybe a century ago. i mean we'd really need some kind of revolution. art is getting stuck. something should happen soon. i dont really know what, but something that change peoples mind. i don't really know the conditions abroad but this is what i see inland.
it's creepy how modern media turns these people around me into mindless zombi hordes of the shopping centres... maybe my girlfriend has right that we should move to tasmania, or in a desert or something ;)
06 June 2005, 04:22 PM
Pretty much disagree with most of what you said.
...We see a lot of pictures, paintings, songs and even texts and other art forms that do nothing else but being nice very often.Not sure what this means.
...Popular culture is just a culture controlled and thought to make money. It's art without meaning, often very very similar to anything.You seem to fall in the "if everyone likes it, it must be cr@p" crowd.
...Anything that is different will never get any money.Wrong. In our culture people are always looking for the next new thing. People are lavishly rewarded for new and different styles and inventions. The thing is that it has to not only be different. It also has to be "good".
...Paintings or general images also get emptied from their meaning. There are a lot of paintings and images that carry ideas or thoughts, but where is the real market for that except a few interested people...If I don't like the stuff you do it's because I'm not one of the "few interested people" ? Elitism ?
...It takes a lot of time and money to do art, and it's not with disillusionned people working in grocery stores and places like that that it's really gonna evolve.Wrong. Art evloves quickest in these kind of situations. It's adversity which sparks the artistic muse.
...When is the last time you heard about a great painter who changes things, a movie who is revolutionnary who had some theater time ?All the bloody time. I could name them, but a list of films would be boring.
...Art is sick, how do we cure it ?No, it's not. It's going gang-busters. The problem seems that you think that having large amounts of people participating in and enjoying art is a bad thing.
06 June 2005, 01:04 PM
slaughters, I have to agree with you with all this. I think the mass appeal of art is the coolest thing ever, I love that art isn't this stuffy crap thing that people seem to want to make it but it's out there, real stuff. Rap, computers, wearable art, advertisements, they can definitely all be art and appeal to people, I think art is out there and it's going strong.
06 June 2005, 01:04 PM
This thread has been automatically closed as it remained inactive for 12 months. If you wish to continue the discussion, please create a new thread in the appropriate forum.