Which artist would you be, and why?

[Kyriakos]

Out of the three major arts, that is literature, painting and music, which would better express you, and for what reason? Which would you serve if you had the chance, the time, and the will?

I was for a time (a few years) a musician, but never a painter (my painting skills were abysmal from the start). I think that despite the fact that in modern music usually you have lyrics, the experience of reading a long text cannot be replicated in that other art.
Also, although again what is written can be missunderstood (probably happens all of the time) at least you have more points to focus on to try to examine, ulinke in music where the sound is battling the libretto for recognition often-times.

And you? What did you vote for, and why?

 

[Save_Ferris]

Why are actors always overlooked?

 

[Kyriakos]

Yes, i thought of acting, sculpure, architecture, carving etc, but most of the time those three arts are being regarded as the major ones.

Besides, it can be argued that an actor is heavily dependant on other people to produce his art.

 

[Mr. Dictator]

Literature, specifically poetry. It's literature from the musical mind.

I also play music, and strive for a lyrical style.

 

[Tani Coyote]

Literature. I have inherited my mother's interest in writing and apparently her skill in it. I think it'd be the occupation I'd most enjoy.

I use my visual creative skills primarily to give an idea what a character or concept looks like. Similar to how a comic book writer often only does raw concepts of what he introduces but it's up to the actual artist to refine and implement it.

 

[Ramius75]

Painter ! i can work with the ladies...

 

[Godwynn]

Sculptor

 

[Murky]

Painter or Photographer because a picture says a thousand works. I do like to read, though.

 

[Kyriakos]

Excellent painting

 

[NickyJ]

Gah, I made a mistake. I put down "musician" instead of "painter". I would want to be a painter because I can just get a few buckets of paint, pour it on a canvas, sell it for a few thousand dollars as "modern art", and repeat the process until I purchase Greece as my own personal empire.

 

[Ramius75]

Gah, I made a mistake. I put down "musician" instead of "painter". I would want to be a painter because I can just get a few buckets of paint, pour it on a canvas, sell it for a few thousand dollars as "modern art", and repeat the process until I purchase Greece as my own personal empire.

its difficult to outdone this guy...

 

[Angst]

Not painter, even though I like to draw.

I'd prefer to be a musician. Music is excellent and makes the body flow in motion, an emotion shared by everyone.

 

[Dachs]

Sculptor

Pygmalion?

 

[Zelig]

I would be Leonardo.

 

[NickyJ]

its difficult to outdone this guy...

Spoiler :

That's difficult?

Okay then, let's see him beat this:

 

[Murky]

its difficult to outdone this guy...

Art is just an act of human expression. You often hear people dis modern art as just throwing pain on a canvas. In some cases, that is literally true. It's still an act of expression. One thing you can say about modern art is that it's difficult to reproduce it exactly. A competent artist can convincingly reproduce the Mona Lisa but how would you reproduce a painting like the one in the above post? You would need to know the order that the pain went on the canvas for one, then you would need to reproduce the random physics to produce the effects. That is why modern art is popular because it's so difficult to fake an original. That and it still beats a blank wall.

 

[NickyJ]

Art is just an act of human expression. You often hear people dis modern art as just throwing pain on a canvas. In some cases, that is literally true. It's still an act of expression. One thing you can say about modern art is that it's difficult to reproduce it exactly. A competent artist can convincingly reproduce the Mona Lisa but how would you reproduce a painting like the one in the above post? You would need to know the order that the pain went on the canvas for one, then you would need to reproduce the random physics to produce the effects. That is why modern art is popular because it's so difficult to fake an original. That and it still beats a blank wall.

Since when was art defined by "reproducibility"?

 

[Murky]

Since when was art defined by "reproducibility"?

It's not defined that way. Originality is what sets an artist apart from the crowd. If you can make your art different but difficult to copy then you are probably producing guaranteed original artwork. Modern art collectors love to buy one of a kind original artwork.

 

[NickyJ]

In that case, would you consider the painting I posted above as art?

 

[Murky]

In that case, would you consider the painting I posted above as art?

Anything you can get away with is art. Convincing someone to buy it is a different matter. You usually have to have some degree of art fame before your paintings are worth anything.