A penny can make all the difference when the cost of your love is a pound.

[salophile]

Audition went... okay, I guess. The two professors seemed to like the pieces I chose, and were even laughing when I did the Jane Martin piece, especially when I flipped them off at the end. They wanted me to tap into more rage when I did the Shepard piece, encouraging me to get really loud and physical. The interview portion went less than

Comments

[dizmo]

*much huglies*

[opheliasfire]

*tries to help hug it better? :D?*

And as for the "art for art's sake" idea... I've always totally agreed. Art doesn't have to always be some kind of supreme allegory for a given political issue or societal ill. Can't art just be art, dammit? XD Can't we write, sing, play, recite, draw, and paint just to make something beautiful in its own right?

[salophile]

*hugs back!* -- And I just got really confused because I tried to answer this comment with a pupjournal.

I'd definitely agree that art can't exist just because the artist wants to, that there has to be some reason that you're making it. But honestly, most of the time it's nothing huge. I write poems about bad grades or stupid coworkers or writer's block, and while it's not "great" art it still falls under the category. I figure once I get good enough at what I'm saying, I'll probably have the life experience to have some sort of drive to put art into, and I'm still crossing my fingers on this.

[gandsgirl]

That's weird, because I've never heard people express that opinion about art for art's sake...Everyone I've talked to believes it can exist. And how could propaganda be for art's sake anyway? It has a specific purpose.

[salophile]

I see you're still up too. *waves* Scarily, I think the person I heard say this was Perry Lorenzo (quoting someone else), although I'm also fairly certain I've heard it from more than one source. I never understood the propaganda thing either, unless it was propaganda for the artist ("Look how great I am, I can paint/write this").