E-Mail Post To A Friend

Email a copy of 'Arguments in Bird Seeds' to a friend

* Required Field

Your Name: *

Your E-Mail: *

Your Remark:

Friend's Name: *

Separate multiple entries with a comma. Maximum 5 entries.

Friend's E-Mail: *

Separate multiple entries with a comma. Maximum 5 entries.

Image Verification: *

 Loading ...

1. Mark ElRayes
   October 13th, 2007 at 1:58 pm

   again. more bullshit in the name of art.

   That was harsh, I apologize.

2. Alex
   October 13th, 2007 at 2:33 pm

   Well, what is art?

   Sure, if *everything* is art, then nothing is, but where do you distinguish the line between art and not art?

3. Vonskippy
   October 13th, 2007 at 7:06 pm

   Art by nature is pretty much undefinable.

   But lets not confuse a clever idea, or a unique but simplistic technique as real art. Real art takes real talent, real skill, and real knowledge - none of which all this pop “art” crap has.

   It’s only because real art is so scarce, that the art world, art critics, and more importantly the art snobs (aka investors) have invented all this pop art nonsense so that they have something to build their artificially valued business on.

   Most modern art relies solely on the pompous evaluations of (mostly) people who have no real world skills what so ever.

4. John J.
   October 13th, 2007 at 7:25 pm

   Gratuitous use of the word art…

   I went to the bathroom today. Now THAT was art.

5. ted
   October 13th, 2007 at 11:02 pm

   Whatever Art is, it ain’t the garbage that’s on this dude’s web site.

6. Tempscire
   October 13th, 2007 at 11:11 pm

   It’s more art than that white canvas was.

7. Anthony
   October 14th, 2007 at 3:21 pm

   let’s forget the word “art” and just take into account that those words provoke just as much thought as most pictures.

8. sm
   October 14th, 2007 at 3:43 pm

   Arguing over what constitutes art is like arguing what constitutes beauty. Only people with a lot of free time and little common sense bother.

9. Sid Morrison
   October 15th, 2007 at 11:47 am

   Yeah, it’s tough to argue art. I resort to a simple rule: If the professional artist (I’m not talking hobbyists) can support himself through art, his talent must be good enough that at least a few people find value in it (and are willing to pay for it).

   The converse of course are those “artists” that can’t seem to create anything that anyone is willing to pay for (with their OWN money). If they only survive off government teat (whether outight welfare or through Arts sponsorship programs) then they are but parasites and worthy of rebuke & scorn.

PLEASE LEAVE A COMMENT