|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sun Apr 10, 2011 2:01 am
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 11, 2011 2:54 am
 |
|
|
|
resonantscythe Yeah, it gets completely outrageous. One pic I saw was just a teal background with white streaks. And it gets hung up in one of the freaking country's best museums.
The funny part is that those pieces are representative of the idea that there are no boundaries to what Art may be and that Art is nothing more than the translation of nonphysical items such as thoughts, ideas, emotions, whims, thought patterns, reflex, music, attitude, chaos, Humanity, and even Nothingness into physically viewable mediums. It's that deep!
As a consequence, part of the value of an Art piece comes from the viewer's ability to read/understand the piece and the nonphysical items it is attempting to convey.
Lol... it's like how a block of text in Latin can be useless garbage to one person, but enlightening stuff to another.
8P I used to mock pieces like that, but it made sense after a while lolol -- people should actually appreciate those pieces simply because of the fact that they're what helped other styles become recognized/accepted by the Art world.
In other words, we'd be drawing the same old stuff and no new ideas would be generated if none of these "silly"/"pointless" pieces were made... simply because they wouldn't be considered Art as it doesn't fall under the "strict" requirements that would define it as such.
If anything is to be gained from Art appreciation classes, it should be the fact that Art has gone a long way to get out of boxes and chains and actually be considered akin to Nature (limitless and unrestrained).
The "nonsense" pieces hanging in the "famous"/"best" museums serve as reminders of this idea!
XD Lol, sorry for the random rant... but it's true; it gets very tiring to keep drawing people after a while and sometimes scribbling up a bunch of nonsense helps generate some new ideas as well as interesting comments/interpretations. Also... :Z it makes me sad when people don't recognize some of my art pieces as Art just because it looks simple and nothing like a Da Vinci or a Renoir (very realistic pieces with solid, easily recognizable and ordinary forms and etc). |
 |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 11, 2011 3:26 am
|
|
|
 |
@GPA discussion:
GPA is silly... no one actually takes them seriously or applies a heavy focus on them when it comes to employment. Only huge businesses use them for anything (applicant filtering), but even then there's ways to easily get around that and they often only use them when applicant inflow is expected to be large.
Also, only extremely low and high GPA's are looked at:
Low GPA's (0-1.5) = the person is questionable and there may be a story behind why their GPA is so so low. Who knows, they may actually be a genius whose intellect simply doesn't conform to rigid standards and methods imployed in educational institutions (AKA bad test takers, rebellious kids, free thinkers... etc)
High GPA (3.5-4.0)= this person may be a shut-in with no life and may be obnoxious to be around with OR a person who did nothing but regurgitate information and not necessarily learned anything and is incapable of using the information for REAL-WORLD applications OR a pompous p***k that may end up just being an a*****e to everyone and take my job as the employer.
Hohoho, this means that a person with a 2.0-3.0 GPA can easily walk away with a job that a 3.5-4.0 person with numerous titles and degrees also applied for... simply because they could apply knowledge given to them in actual real-world scenarios, was easy to get along with, and was just an overall awesome/nice person with much potential to become a friend.
pirate
pirate Moral of the story:
GPA is stupid, don't let it get to your head as the one and only thing that defines you in the job market. Petty numbers cannot accurately represent skill, experience, personality, intent, and attitude.
After graduation and the first job... no one even looks at GPA.
That's how useless it is. College is about honing one's Human Capital, not GPA.
Remember, GPA = Grossly Perverted Assumption.
(Lol, I just felt like commenting and also because my parents deal with this stuff being in managerial positions and they talk about it alot... especially now since I'm looking for a job myself pirate )
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Apr 11, 2011 6:38 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2011 2:13 am
|
|
|
 |
LilChibiusa I didn't know that you did art, ED! Were you an art major? I probably wouldn't have agreed with you a year ago, but now I agree completely. I graduated with a very high GPA, and no one cares a bit. It's all about experience and networking. And, with all of the people trying to find jobs, I don't have much to offer anyone in terms of things that they are looking for. I know I'm a very intelligent and capable person, but when so many people are looking for jobs, the inexperienced people like me are often overlooked.
Lolz, I'm an engineer major. Though, there is a lot of artistic stuff that comes into play when it comes to engineering stuff [and lol, making Art is one of my hobbies XD~... I figured the guild banner would've hinted at that XD;]
And yeah... it's definitely about experience and networking. There is this nifty trick you can do with employers though... engaging them in an interesting conversation. I've done it several times at job fairs and such -- just jump in and legitimately talk and sit with the representatives about their company and what they do... get to know the person basically and not make it look like you're just there to bribe or beg them for a job like all the rest. :Z This seriously helps build one's network and gives you an edge above all others because... it's like they're interviewing you already only you're doing it for them. XD I've gotten many an interview and job ops this way even though I'm totally lacking job experience biggrin
The reps and interviewers are still people after all... they're not robots, so there's still a fighting chance if you know how to get along and appeal to people |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2011 10:45 am
|
|
|
|
Ethereal Darkness LilChibiusa I didn't know that you did art, ED! Were you an art major? I probably wouldn't have agreed with you a year ago, but now I agree completely. I graduated with a very high GPA, and no one cares a bit. It's all about experience and networking. And, with all of the people trying to find jobs, I don't have much to offer anyone in terms of things that they are looking for. I know I'm a very intelligent and capable person, but when so many people are looking for jobs, the inexperienced people like me are often overlooked. Lolz, I'm an engineer major. Though, there is a lot of artistic stuff that comes into play when it comes to engineering stuff [and lol, making Art is one of my hobbies XD~... I figured the guild banner would've hinted at that XD;]
And yeah... it's definitely about experience and networking. There is this nifty trick you can do with employers though... engaging them in an interesting conversation. I've done it several times at job fairs and such -- just jump in and legitimately talk and sit with the representatives about their company and what they do... get to know the person basically and not make it look like you're just there to bribe or beg them for a job like all the rest. :Z This seriously helps build one's network and gives you an edge above all others because... it's like they're interviewing you already only you're doing it for them. XD I've gotten many an interview and job ops this way even though I'm totally lacking job experience biggrin
The reps and interviewers are still people after all... they're not robots, so there's still a fighting chance if you know how to get along and appeal to people
*face palms* I forgot about the banner. xp rofl
I thought that it would be easier getting a job with something practical like an engineering degree than with something so impractical like an English degree. How long have you been on the job hunt?
If I have one thing going for me, it's the gift of gab. I'm great at talking with random strangers, so hopefully I made a good impression on the people I spoke with at the job fair. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2011 11:28 am
|
|
|
|
Ethereal Darkness resonantscythe Yeah, it gets completely outrageous. One pic I saw was just a teal background with white streaks. And it gets hung up in one of the freaking country's best museums. The funny part is that those pieces are representative of the idea that there are no boundaries to what Art may be and that Art is nothing more than the translation of nonphysical items such as thoughts, ideas, emotions, whims, thought patterns, reflex, music, attitude, chaos, Humanity, and even Nothingness into physically viewable mediums. It's that deep! As a consequence, part of the value of an Art piece comes from the viewer's ability to read/understand the piece and the nonphysical items it is attempting to convey. Lol... it's like how a block of text in Latin can be useless garbage to one person, but enlightening stuff to another. 8P I used to mock pieces like that, but it made sense after a while lolol -- people should actually appreciate those pieces simply because of the fact that they're what helped other styles become recognized/accepted by the Art world. In other words, we'd be drawing the same old stuff and no new ideas would be generated if none of these "silly"/"pointless" pieces were made... simply because they wouldn't be considered Art as it doesn't fall under the "strict" requirements that would define it as such. If anything is to be gained from Art appreciation classes, it should be the fact that Art has gone a long way to get out of boxes and chains and actually be considered akin to Nature (limitless and unrestrained). The "nonsense" pieces hanging in the "famous"/"best" museums serve as reminders of this idea! XD Lol, sorry for the random rant... but it's true; it gets very tiring to keep drawing people after a while and sometimes scribbling up a bunch of nonsense helps generate some new ideas as well as interesting comments/interpretations. Also... :Z it makes me sad when people don't recognize some of my art pieces as Art just because it looks simple and nothing like a Da Vinci or a Renoir (very realistic pieces with solid, easily recognizable and ordinary forms and etc).
Actually, I've been really getting into art lately, and while normally I would agree that there can be deeper meanings behind the seemingly random strokes, sometimes I say "Okay, there's that, and then there's the people who just take advantage of that reasoning as an excuse to push what amounts their random sketches"
It's not that there aren't different forms of visual self expression, it' just that with the way I've lived, I've come to demand effort. And I wasn't kidding when I talked about the sculpture that said the guy just randomly threw it together and decided to call it art with no deeper meaning, that's honestly what the display said: some thing along the lines of "put together from random scraps". That doesn't make him a genius on par with Tony Stark, it makes him a guy who sold a pile of garbage to a museum. I can respect his coercion skills that's for sure. In THAT way he was an artist. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Tue Apr 12, 2011 10:05 pm
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 13, 2011 1:27 am
|
|
|
|
LilChibiusa Ethereal Darkness LilChibiusa I didn't know that you did art, ED! Were you an art major? I probably wouldn't have agreed with you a year ago, but now I agree completely. I graduated with a very high GPA, and no one cares a bit. It's all about experience and networking. And, with all of the people trying to find jobs, I don't have much to offer anyone in terms of things that they are looking for. I know I'm a very intelligent and capable person, but when so many people are looking for jobs, the inexperienced people like me are often overlooked.
And yeah... it's definitely about experience and networking. There is this nifty trick you can do with employers though... engaging them in an interesting conversation. I've done it several times at job fairs and such -- just jump in and legitimately talk and sit with the representatives about their company and what they do... get to know the person basically and not make it look like you're just there to bribe or beg them for a job like all the rest. :Z This seriously helps build one's network and gives you an edge above all others because... it's like they're interviewing you already only you're doing it for them. XD I've gotten many an interview and job ops this way even though I'm totally lacking job experience biggrin
The reps and interviewers are still people after all... they're not robots, so there's still a fighting chance if you know how to get along and appeal to people*face palms* I forgot about the banner. xp rofl I thought that it would be easier getting a job with something practical like an engineering degree than with something so impractical like an English degree. How long have you been on the job hunt? If I have one thing going for me, it's the gift of gab. I'm great at talking with random strangers, so hopefully I made a good impression on the people I spoke with at the job fair.
About a year for this year razz [lolz, graduating after all]. So far it looks good -- :z I'm definitely looking for a solid job [although an internship or w/e is good too XD]. 8D I just wants teh moneys and be done with school and stuff already XD [to be blunt]
And yeah -- its "easier" to get a job as an engineer, but there's competition nonetheless which makes stuff not as easy as it would seem :]
And hooray 8D hopefully you did -- good impressions are always very helpful |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 13, 2011 1:47 am
|
|
|
|
resonantscythe Actually, I've been really getting into art lately, and while normally I would agree that there can be deeper meanings behind the seemingly random strokes, sometimes I say "Okay, there's that, and then there's the people who just take advantage of that reasoning as an excuse to push what amounts their random sketches" It's not that there aren't different forms of visual self expression, it' just that with the way I've lived, I've come to demand effort. And I wasn't kidding when I talked about the sculpture that said the guy just randomly threw it together and decided to call it art with no deeper meaning, that's honestly what the display said: some thing along the lines of "put together from random scraps". That doesn't make him a genius on par with Tony Stark, it makes him a guy who sold a pile of garbage to a museum. I can respect his coercion skills that's for sure. In THAT way he was an artist.
8P People like that will always be around [as in, people who exploit anything for profit]. That's nothing new lol.
But even then, there could be a deeper meaning to what someone has made but they decide to downplay it for any number of reasons be it humility, low self-esteem, etc. I know that I for one do that... I can never understand how others can see stuff that I make to be "over the top" or "amazing" when in -my- eyes I see nothing more than inadequate pieces where I didn't really do much other than throw random strokes together.
In the end, for Art it's a matter of how the piece is viewed by people. To some, like you, it's "garbage". But there are also others who find it "awesome"/"appealing" so you can't necessarily call those pieces "garbage" and demand it to be a fact -- everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but one cannot shove it down others' throats especially when it comes to Art :]
@Chibi:
See... when it comes to what you said, like "ready made objects as art" or "effort is necessary for something to be considered Art"... one could say that Photography is not Art... simply because you're not really putting any effort in the act and even more so... the image itself is of something that is already "ready made". And yet... a lot of people consider Photography to be an Art... why? Because they entice opinions, both good ["that's wonderful and just perfect..."] and bad ["that's stupid, it's garbage, there was no effort in this... I could totally do this myself and I bet I could make a ton of money from doing this garbage"].
:Z Not to be meanly poking at you, but you can see what I'm trying to get at right?
The more restrictive and close-minded one gets with Art... the more restricted and close-minded Art becomes and Art "forms" become ruled out.
Effort, effortless, meaningful, meaningless, planned, random... no matter what, it's all valid parameters for defining something as Art.
For the "tin can with pencils in it" example, one could say that it was an attempt to recreate a specific image/view of those objects that just looked perfect. An idea/concept that is similar to when you're outside and see the most perfect view/angle of a specific scenery, object, or w/e... an image that you totally would like to freeze it and keep it because it's just absolutely perfect to you.
But again as I said... Art matters a lot more on how the Art piece is viewed than anything else. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 13, 2011 2:05 am
|
|
|
|
Lol... 8D Here's an example of what I've been babbling about:
Random piece of randomness that I did on paper:
I randomly do this all over the place [as in... all over the place... be it walls, people, or w/e... I've slowly confined myself to paper, but I can't help it especially since it's something I do when I'm idling/bored].
Surprisingly [mostly to me], this stuff is seen by people as "appealing", "interesting", "deep", "meaningful", "intricate" or Art in general.
:Z I for one find it to be just a bundle of random shapes/blotches put together with absolutely no meaning whatsoever let alone demanding in terms of effort/skill [hell, oftentimes when its on paper, I just trash it; although the person who found it to be amazing usually takes it before I do so or they get pissed off at me for trashing something that was worth keeping]... but, as it seems my opinion isn't what matters when it comes to defining what is Art.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 13, 2011 11:45 am
|
|
|
|
Well, I'm not saying my way is the "right" way of looking at things, or that people should see it only my way, just that for me, personally, stuff like the junk pile isn't good enough.
I can actually see why people would like your doodlings. It actually is very intricate. And not to sound presumptuous, but I don't think intricate means what you think it means. It just means something twisted-up/complicated looking, which that picture is, whether or not it's art. Actually someone who's onto psychology could probably argue about that being some sort of message from your subconscious trying to spill out or some such thing. Dunno, never studied it myself, just rambling, haha.
Now the thing about photography foe me is this: the person who took the picture had to A) Get there B) Decide on lighting and exposure C) decide on color or black and white, and if color, whether to use an effect, or use natural color D) Depending on what's being captured, use flash or not E) determine if time of day will affect the photo F) Decide on hand held or tripod and as an extension of that allowing or not allowing motion blur if any is present G)Unless the first try is spot on, take multiple pictures until the desired image is acquired. Unless the natural result is desired.
So I feel photography takes plenty of effort and skill to catch a worthwhile image.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 13, 2011 12:49 pm
|
|
|
|
You're so right about photography. @_@ I was friends with some art majors, and it is surprisingly difficult to get an interesting show, and to have all of the parameters working so that it actually looks good. Lighting and natural motion is probably the hardest thing about taking a decent picture. While some photography is considered art, I wouldn't say that a random picture of your friends at the beach with a disposable camera would be considered art.
@ED - If art is essentially the interpretation of a person to objects or surroundings, how would you define art? If there isn't a set way of saying what is art and what isn't art, how can you keep from saying that a dumpster on the side of the road is art? I appreciate the idea of looking at familiar objects in new ways, but can that really be considered art unless something meaningful is created? Btw, nice drawing! You have great balance, spacing, use of light and dark, and shape interaction. The bottom bottom part looks a bit better than the top part though because of the amount of white space throwing of the black/white balance of the other part of the drawing.
So, I guess what this whole conversation boils down to would be the question of "What is art?" If I still had access to the Oxford English Dictionary, I would look it up and see what I could find since it is the authoritative dictionary of the English language.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 13, 2011 3:34 pm
|
|
|
|
LilChibiusa You're so right about photography. @_@ I was friends with some art majors, and it is surprisingly difficult to get an interesting show, and to have all of the parameters working so that it actually looks good. Lighting and natural motion is probably the hardest thing about taking a decent picture. While some photography is considered art, I wouldn't say that a random picture of your friends at the beach with a disposable camera would be considered art. @ED - If art is essentially the interpretation of a person to objects or surroundings, how would you define art? If there isn't a set way of saying what is art and what isn't art, how can you keep from saying that a dumpster on the side of the road is art? I appreciate the idea of looking at familiar objects in new ways, but can that really be considered art unless something meaningful is created? Btw, nice drawing! You have great balance, spacing, use of light and dark, and shape interaction. The bottom bottom part looks a bit better than the top part though because of the amount of white space throwing of the black/white balance of the other part of the drawing. So, I guess what this whole conversation boils down to would be the question of "What is art?" If I still had access to the Oxford English Dictionary, I would look it up and see what I could find since it is the authoritative dictionary of the English language.
"If there isn't a set way of saying what is art and what isn't art, how can you keep from saying that a dumpster on the side of the road is art? "
"So, I guess what this whole conversation boils down to would be the question of "What is art?""
To answer simply:
Haha, there is nothing that can keep anyone from saying that a dumpster on the side of the road is Art -- that's the beauty of what Art is! Art is life in general and our perception of it -- that's the true definition of Art.
If you want to be extremely technical for the sake of logical/organized comfort -- one can resort to classifying Art "forms". Hence, terms such as Impressionism, Realism, Abstract, etc.
Even then, these closed-form definitions/ideas of what Art is continually change with time and culture -- so these prove to be nothing more than temporary comforts. The same goes for dictionary definitions -- the most susceptible to these factors.
Random tangent:
Lol, thanks for the compliment as well as the analysis on my randomness btw.
XD I never thought to actually look at it in terms of utilization of positive/negative space. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Apr 13, 2011 3:50 pm
|
|
|
|
resonantscythe Well, I'm not saying my way is the "right" way of looking at things, or that people should see it only my way, just that for me, personally, stuff like the junk pile isn't good enough. I can actually see why people would like your doodlings. It actually is very intricate. And not to sound presumptuous, but I don't think intricate means what you think it means. It just means something twisted-up/complicated looking, which that picture is, whether or not it's art. Actually someone who's onto psychology could probably argue about that being some sort of message from your subconscious trying to spill out or some such thing. Dunno, never studied it myself, just rambling, haha. Now the thing about photography foe me is this: the person who took the picture had to A) Get there B) Decide on lighting and exposure C) decide on color or black and white, and if color, whether to use an effect, or use natural color D) Depending on what's being captured, use flash or not E) determine if time of day will affect the photo F) Decide on hand held or tripod and as an extension of that allowing or not allowing motion blur if any is present G)Unless the first try is spot on, take multiple pictures until the desired image is acquired. Unless the natural result is desired. So I feel photography takes plenty of effort and skill to catch a worthwhile image.
:3 Thanks for the comment/analysis on my randomness there.
I would agree that my "random doodles" can possibly be subconscious messages to the external world. There is no such thing as "randomly performed action" in psychology after all -- but that's definitely off the topic at hand and could be best saved for another day xd
On your statement on photography:
Essentially this is the process in which things are defined -- one attempts to establish/reason out why something is considered Art to them. At the same token, this is the same process in which one can attempt to "sell" something to another as Art.
Of course, this brings me back to my continual statement on Art being defined mostly by personal opinions.
I chose to bring up photography because it is one of those Art "forms" that is widely argued over whether or not it is truly Art... simply because anyone with a camera could easily appear to be at the same level as "top level" photographers. A lot of talking and "explanation"/"persuasion" occurs when it comes to getting people to find appeal in photography -- at least in comparison to other "forms" such as Impressionism or Realism wherein "artistic skill" is definitely/easily observable. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reply
