Sep 28, 2006 02:12
shouldn't all art be applied art?
"Applied arts refers to the application of design and aesthetics to objects of function and everyday use. Whereas fine arts serve as intellectual stimulation to the viewer or academic sensibilities." that's how I just read it. but shouldn't the intellectual be able to sit in that fantastic wooden chair and consider it?
I think there's a conflict between my expressive self and my pragmatic self. the problem with successful artists who throw themselves to the canvas and paint without thinking about the purpose (or the business model) of their art is that they're discovered by some businessman... they're discovered and they're sold. and I don't think I can let that happen.
maybe my problem is that I'm trying to be the salesman and the artist at the same time. but really, I just want to make things for people to love, have enough money to support my way of life, my family, and fund my experiences. because I don't care how free your spirit is, it's not getting anywhere without gas in the tank.
and that's the funniest thing about art. if a complete stranger loves you enough, they're willing to give you the money they fought for in exchange for what you made. except nobody loves a car salesman. it's hard to have both.
-Cody