(no subject)
Jan. 27th, 2022 09:49 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
kradeelav "How do you as a creator and consumer think about separating the art from the artist or death of author/artist types of situations? What is the personal inflection/infection point, if there is one, when creator and creation are too intertwined?" meibatsu
meibatsuMy thoughts here aren't nearly as well articulated as your question alone; so my apologies if the next few bits are all over the place, and not at all up to the caliber of art critique / theory 101 x) believe it or not I actually get quite intimidated by the topic (despite technically going to "art school", i've never once had a class or reading on interpreting art).
from the self-taught, mmm, lowbrow? fandom/kink art angle, "death of the author" types of topics usually make me quite wary as nine times out of ten it's brought up in the context of "is this artist Problematic(tm)?" as a way to discredit them by pulling up "dirt" whether it be in their personal lives or percieved in their works (eg, shadman, basically every lolisho artist in existence. i feel for them - it's tiring! sometimes u wanna just be a skanky edgelord!)
I'm tired of discrediting people purely based off of idealogical fractures or by being just deviant enough for the moral zeitgeist. it's not a popular opinion in some circles these days, but I much prefer reaching across ideological lines and engaging with books, art, media that even have my hackles up at first. You learn a lot about yourself, at bare minimum, such as being able to better articulate why it made you feel skeevy.
(I really love what glasshard mentioned once about the subtle difference between propaganda (overtly racist works meant to persuade) and art - https://glassshard.tumblr.com/post/640616480539656192/to-further-the-discussion-how-to-you-feel-about - but she also made the immediate point that it is never, never that simple, and that the public dialogue and reaction to that spectrum of messiness that's more the part that matters.)
which got on a tangent. "death of the artist" isn't always about an unfavorable read as much as it is just a different interpretation of the artwork versus the creator. to which ... shrug?
when I approach art as a viewer - I personally tend to gravitate to art that gives a strong reaction that lingers beyond just a 'oh that's kickass' or 'oh that's pretty'. id (technical ability to depict hits-you-in-the-gut-kinks, satisfying and/or nauseating violence with a subversive point, or seemingly random emotion dredged up from who the fuck knows where), superego (stories or theoretical situations that hit uncomfortably close to moral grey areas that I struggle over or straight up don't understand), and ego (the delicious combination of both).
offensive art is a delight to me (I tend to ignore everything else; doesn't mean it's Bad, just not my speed), to which - hell, I may be a bit of a visual masochist. :P but I do think that comes from being an ex fundie/neocon, and very slowly, very agonizingly questioning myself out of the whole shebang. That is how I did it, by the way - decided at one point that if my worldview and mentality was so perfect, there was no harm in checking out what other folks had to say. If I felt like the "other side" had a point, then they deserved a fair shake and a listen.
real life is deliciously nuanced, it turns out.
so by asking myself the questions of "how was the artist able to elicit this reaction with technical skill? from what life experience or mood was the artist coming from when they wanted to make this? who or what are they making this for - whether it's a reaction or a plea? why do i gravitate so hard to this part of the story? is there anything in here I just cannot agree with and why? does it stem from my experiences? would I feel the same in their shoes?" - and so on, I prefer to frame it more as a ... dialogue? point of contact with another human to empathize, understand, make something more.
less a binary and more a start to something achingly human.
I'm tired of discrediting people purely based off of idealogical fractures or by being just deviant enough for the moral zeitgeist. it's not a popular opinion in some circles these days, but I much prefer reaching across ideological lines and engaging with books, art, media that even have my hackles up at first. You learn a lot about yourself, at bare minimum, such as being able to better articulate why it made you feel skeevy.
(I really love what glasshard mentioned once about the subtle difference between propaganda (overtly racist works meant to persuade) and art - https://glassshard.tumblr.com/post/640616480539656192/to-further-the-discussion-how-to-you-feel-about - but she also made the immediate point that it is never, never that simple, and that the public dialogue and reaction to that spectrum of messiness that's more the part that matters.)
which got on a tangent. "death of the artist" isn't always about an unfavorable read as much as it is just a different interpretation of the artwork versus the creator. to which ... shrug?
when I approach art as a viewer - I personally tend to gravitate to art that gives a strong reaction that lingers beyond just a 'oh that's kickass' or 'oh that's pretty'. id (technical ability to depict hits-you-in-the-gut-kinks, satisfying and/or nauseating violence with a subversive point, or seemingly random emotion dredged up from who the fuck knows where), superego (stories or theoretical situations that hit uncomfortably close to moral grey areas that I struggle over or straight up don't understand), and ego (the delicious combination of both).
offensive art is a delight to me (I tend to ignore everything else; doesn't mean it's Bad, just not my speed), to which - hell, I may be a bit of a visual masochist. :P but I do think that comes from being an ex fundie/neocon, and very slowly, very agonizingly questioning myself out of the whole shebang. That is how I did it, by the way - decided at one point that if my worldview and mentality was so perfect, there was no harm in checking out what other folks had to say. If I felt like the "other side" had a point, then they deserved a fair shake and a listen.
real life is deliciously nuanced, it turns out.
so by asking myself the questions of "how was the artist able to elicit this reaction with technical skill? from what life experience or mood was the artist coming from when they wanted to make this? who or what are they making this for - whether it's a reaction or a plea? why do i gravitate so hard to this part of the story? is there anything in here I just cannot agree with and why? does it stem from my experiences? would I feel the same in their shoes?" - and so on, I prefer to frame it more as a ... dialogue? point of contact with another human to empathize, understand, make something more.
less a binary and more a start to something achingly human.
