Debating about what is or isn’t art is kinda like debating about how many angels can dance on the head of a pin. There is no pat answer.
how can we relate this back to “sweet movie”?
particularly the lines, “is there life on earth? is there life after birth?” i sense a connection.
Bobby, I never said it’s worthless. I just said it’s simply unknown. Unknowable. Even if that other person is the artist’s best friend patting him on the back, then that’s acknowledgment. But for you to say that the artist himself can be certain that what he’s doing is real art without that confirmation, I’m telling you it’s a lonely spot. I was an unpublished writer for many years and very isolated, and it took all my will and mental faculties not to go insane during that time, basically.
ok. but now you’re going in yet another line of argument. are you an artist if you can’t sell something?
i guess i can figure out what your answer would be, in your situation. but i also guess this is an impossible debate, as someone else mentioned. what is art? what is an artist?
how do we feel about makavejev as an artist?
Yeah, it’s probably impossible, Bobby, and I’m sorry that you thought my line of reasoning was ogre-ish or condescending to undiscovered artists. That wasn’t my intention.
Good post.
Moderated
has anybody read the new book “terror and joy: the films of dusan makaveyev”? just came out. first book on the director’s work ever published.
Bobby Wise
it doesn’t mean a thing if i can’t name them. does that mean they cease to exist as filmmakers, and their art ceases to exist as well?
you’re arguing two different points. one, art that is unrecorded and unremembered is worthless, or may not even be art at all. maybe it doesn’t even exist. can a work of art not be a work of art solely in the presence of its creator?
two, a second party has to say “hey, this is art”, before a work of art can be called such.