(no subject)
so drawing is quickly becoming one of my favorite classes. who'd have thought! i worked with charcoal for the first time in my life and thoroughly enjoyed it. too bad it's irritating my skin. i meant it when i said i'm allergic to literally everything.
theres this kid in my classes named mike, who is painfully homosexual. literally. he's a flamer... which can sometimes be cute, but in this case, is fucking annoying as all hell. anyway, he's "into abstract art." he complains in EVERY single class. in drawing he complains that he can't do the assignment because its too hard, in writing he complains, in resources he complains. he acts like he's some amazing art critic... but he can't draw worth two shits and the only thing he can do is "abstract painting." he's into "painting shapes." i love that. i love that someone who paints mediocre pictures of triangles and circles and squares can get into art school, then complain when they have to go through foundation. don't get me wrong, i appreciate abstract art just as much as the next person... but when it's all a person can do, it makes you wonder if they're really any good at art at all. this kid sells his shitty paintings and makes 4,000 dollars from rich idiots who probably think he's the next dali or something. anyway today i had writing. we were talking about art that mixes images and text. he kept saying how it's "cheap" and he doesn't like it when the artist forces you to look at their work in a certain way and feel a certain way about it. this of course pissed me off since photography and writing are my two favorite things, and i often experience with adding writing or captions or stories to my photographs. he kept saying "it's good for what it is, but it doesn't measure up to rembrandt." no shit, asstard. who says rembrandt is what all artists need to aspire to be? i'm sure your "ABSTRACT PAINTINGS" are right up there with with the skill level of monet and degas, though. did i mention that this kid is a gay, republican mormon? w.t.f.
maybe i'm just biased because i love writing immensely, and i love language and i think art and words should definitely be married. in some cases, sure, it's dumb looking. just like some paintings are dumb looking, and some drawings are dumb looking and some photographs are dumb looking. but it's all subjective. i just hate people who are so naive to the fact that beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
anyway, you continue painting your circles and squares and we'll see if you ever get put in the same category as rembrandt.
i got an A on my first paper. too bad i had to turn it in late since i missed that entire week, and it was taken down to a B. that upsets me a little, but i guess i'm just satisfied knowing it was good enough to get an A. i'm pretty excited about school right now. this entry was entirely too long.
theres this kid in my classes named mike, who is painfully homosexual. literally. he's a flamer... which can sometimes be cute, but in this case, is fucking annoying as all hell. anyway, he's "into abstract art." he complains in EVERY single class. in drawing he complains that he can't do the assignment because its too hard, in writing he complains, in resources he complains. he acts like he's some amazing art critic... but he can't draw worth two shits and the only thing he can do is "abstract painting." he's into "painting shapes." i love that. i love that someone who paints mediocre pictures of triangles and circles and squares can get into art school, then complain when they have to go through foundation. don't get me wrong, i appreciate abstract art just as much as the next person... but when it's all a person can do, it makes you wonder if they're really any good at art at all. this kid sells his shitty paintings and makes 4,000 dollars from rich idiots who probably think he's the next dali or something. anyway today i had writing. we were talking about art that mixes images and text. he kept saying how it's "cheap" and he doesn't like it when the artist forces you to look at their work in a certain way and feel a certain way about it. this of course pissed me off since photography and writing are my two favorite things, and i often experience with adding writing or captions or stories to my photographs. he kept saying "it's good for what it is, but it doesn't measure up to rembrandt." no shit, asstard. who says rembrandt is what all artists need to aspire to be? i'm sure your "ABSTRACT PAINTINGS" are right up there with with the skill level of monet and degas, though. did i mention that this kid is a gay, republican mormon? w.t.f.
maybe i'm just biased because i love writing immensely, and i love language and i think art and words should definitely be married. in some cases, sure, it's dumb looking. just like some paintings are dumb looking, and some drawings are dumb looking and some photographs are dumb looking. but it's all subjective. i just hate people who are so naive to the fact that beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
anyway, you continue painting your circles and squares and we'll see if you ever get put in the same category as rembrandt.
i got an A on my first paper. too bad i had to turn it in late since i missed that entire week, and it was taken down to a B. that upsets me a little, but i guess i'm just satisfied knowing it was good enough to get an A. i'm pretty excited about school right now. this entry was entirely too long.