I've known people that will say that the term "artist" should only be used for a "true artist" and that quality is a factor, and that it makes the word into something cheap when it's used to describe anybody who mades an image (the same way I can make a cabinet but that doesn't make me a carpenter). I've also known people on the other extreme that will say that art is anything someone makes, even if it were just a single line on a sheet of paper, and therefore anyone that makes images is an artist, regardless of skill or experience or how much effort was put into the image (the same way we call the pictures our children draw their "artworks").

Do you think there's more to being an artist than simply making images, and that just making an image doesn't make someone an artist, or is this just an extention of thousands of years of elitism among artists and critics? Is there something in between these two extremes?

It doesn't matter.

I think there is a diff between being an artist and being someone who can make art.

To me an artist is someone that loves to draw.
Art is part of who the artist is.
If a person can draw but doesn't love drawing and if art is not apart of who they are then I wouldn,t call them an artist.
It doesn't matter how good they can draw.

I agree that a single line on a sheet of paper could be considered art, so in the loosest definition anyone is an artist of some sort. Plus artist also applies to music and arguably other fields, making just about anyone qualify.
But if everyone is an artist, then that makes the word pointless. You might as well just call them "alive." I would say to qualify an artist as a useful term, someone should be somewhat devoted to their work.
But really, it doesn't matter, as dan said.

Although I can see certain points Marcello made being true, I think getting labeled an "artist" or "carpenter" or anything, requires a certain amount of skill and devotion to the subject. But fine arts and music are really complex in the art field compared to say being a guitarist. Cause you "know" when somebody plays well, but in fine arts and music, the variety makes it less obvious. So I think a lot of us interpret that differently in who we consider an artist.

Main Entry: art·ist
Pronunciation: 'är-tist
Function: noun
1 a obsolete : one skilled or versed in learned arts b archaic : PHYSICIAN c archaic : ARTISAN
2 a : one who professes and practices an imaginative art b : a person skilled in one of the fine arts
3 : a skilled performer; especially : ARTISTE
4 : one who is adept at something <con artist> <strikeout artist>

Actually I think it does matter, and I have reasons why. One reason is it brings into question the worth of an artist. There's many people out there that view art as nothing more than a luxury, not a necessity, and don't consider art or artists to be important to society or culture. Being an artist often isn't considered the same as having "a real job." I think that line of thought devalidates artists. Many companies, mostly small businesses, view a good graphic designer as someone you can throw a few dollars at and expect a great advertisement from them. Sometimes they view graphic design as an extra to spend on when there's money for it but not something the business actually needs, so again it's looked at as a luxury and again that way of thinking ends up leaving a lot of talent out in the cold because it's not seen as a valid, important thing to do. I remember once in highschool my dad being annoyed I was taking so many "basket weaving classes" as he called them (I've never actually made a basket, he was just expressing how he thought they were wastes of time) instead of important things like math and science.

Another reason it matters is that it questions the nature of being an artist. I've said in the past that the understanding of what we are and why we do the things we do is important. If we can't even answer when something becomes "art" and when a person becomes an "artist" then how do we justify the time and effort spent on making an image or the money spent on buying one? Why do we bother making art in the first place, and just what is it that we're making when we do?

and no, it's not just about labels. As I mentioned in the first post there has been thousands of years of elitism among artists and critics that has been used to determine who gets into galleries, what art people are allowed to make under certain governments, etc.

-if people could possibly avoid treating me like an idiot by quoting the dictionary, I would appriciate it, because it pisses me off.

The dictionary pisses you off????

No, people that treat me like an idiot. There's more to the question than that, and adding things like the pronunciation is just being an ass.

One shouldn't get pissed so easily.

How wise o purple one... :3

That's not getting pissed off easily.And even if it were, people have something called pet peeves; something that may not particularly bother you, but does to certain other people.

In elementary school I went through 4 years of speech therapy because I wasn't able to pronounce words to the point that even my parents could barely understand me most of the time. I rarely bothered even speaking to people as a result of that and had a hard time making friends. People made fun of my inability to speak clearly and some people just assumed I was deaf because I never said anything. Even today I can't pronounce words like "asked." When I try it comes out as "ast." I can't pronounce sixth or months or any of many other words. I spend so much time online because I just never really did make many friends in person. I do not need patronizing crap telling me how to pronounce the word "artist."

Aw, poor redpanda *pats on the back* Now I see why you got pissed off at that. But I do agree with what you're saying redpanda. About the whole artist and art thing.

Redpanda: If someone giving you helpful, reliable, documented information on a subject pisses you off and makes you feel like you're being patronized (ie: the dictionary definition of artist) after you ask a question about a subject, I would advise refraining from asking questions. The dictionary definition answers your question explicitly with "skilled, versed, adept". The fact that you have a speech impediment has nothing to do with it.

Hmm, well if it's just the pronunciation, redpanda could have specified that.And as far as the speech impediment goes, I think DBA should have cut you some slack, but as for the definition itself (which you don't have a problem with) seems alright with me if that isn't part of the problem here.Sorry you had to put up with that when you were younger, I can only imagine how it must've felt :-/...

I would like to think Redpanda is a smart guy. I would like to think that, before asking other people to define a word, he would have the sense to look it up in the dictionary.

DBA, perhaps you were not aware, but there is another definition of patronizing that is "to treat in a condescending manner." This is the manner in which Redpanda used the word. The reason he brought up his speech impediment is to give a little context as to why it bothers him. The pronunciation of the word is completely useless for the discussion of the topic. I'm surprised you could be so insensitive.

Look, I have a lot more ideas and thoughts that I say here. I have a lot more opinions about things than I say. The whole point of me asking these questions is that I'm more interested in knowing what everyong else thinks than in just shouting out what I think. I'm not asking what art is because I don't have my own thoughts or that I don't have my own experience, I'm asking because I want other people to ask these things themselves. I fully believe it's very important for artists to ask themselves these questions but so many of the people I know simply don't until they hit college and are taken back by things they never gave a thought to and aren't prepared for. I'm dealing with that in my classes right now. I'm being asked why I'm using paint or why I'm using computers or anything else for a specific artwork and answers like "because I felt like it" just aren't good enough for these people. We have to give them reasons and someday a lot of you guys will too. I don't ask you questions because I don't have answers, I just wanted to know what yours were.

and the dictionary fails, in my opinion, to include any of the theoretical questions brought up about art from at least the past century of art history. Does it address what the futurists said about art? Does it have one scrap of information about what the feminists said about it and the male domination of it?

That's a very good point. Dictionaries are not good for understanding the connotations of a word.

When I was little I was in speech class too.
I could never pronounce cut or Ant pile and people would mess with me about It.
It's not fun to be unable to pronounce words.

Perhaps I should have wasted my time reading everything that was posted here, which I didn't before I commented. I know all of the uses for the word patronizing, and I didn't see that anyone was doing that here, perhaps, like I said... because I didn't read everything. (the pronunciation of a word just happens to be inclusive with the definition of a word, and I'm sure there was nothing personal intended there) (I'm still not going to read it all, and this is the last post I'll make here in this thread) *Sticks thumbs in ears, wiggles fingers and sticks out tongue* I just don't care today.
(I do have to add who CARES what feminists have to say about anything, really?) AND... I would be the last person to accuse of being insensitive to a disability, since I have a son who is mildly mentally retarded with autism, who because of those things also has a speech impediment and still struggles with it, along with everything else he does on a daily basis that we all take for granted.

Well, that's very nice and fair and generous of you. I suppose we should be grateful you even graced our humble thread with your wisdom at all.

Wasn't this thread about art? :}

Well, in my experiences on the forums, it seems that most of our topics change into something completely different by the end of it.If you were to delete the middle portion of the thread, you would have no idea how a topic changed into something so different.

True , true. Think I'm just trying to get it back to its topic. :}

Hehe, it's the Thread Patrol, eh :)?

redpanda: Is there any way possible I could have known you had this speech problem? No. Your response was irrational and oversensitive. I had no intention of comming across as an ass when I posted the defenition. You can kiss my ass you snot nosed little shit. By the way, it's "invalidates" not "devalidates" ok?

Main Entry: in·val·i·date
Pronunciation: (")in-'va-l&-"dAt
Function: transitive verb
: to make invalid; especially : to weaken or destroy the cogency of

I still don't like the attitude I've gotten from certain people both now and in the past, but I've known for a long time I can make mistakes and I can be an ass too. I'm sorry I went off on axil, even if I had faint reasons, and I don't hold anything against that blondearcher over there.

-edit, and I missed his post by 33 seconds.

I think it all depends on what you define as art. I have seen stuff that made me want to throw up but, there it is in a museum, worth millions, if not at least hundreds of thousands. And I have seen comic book art that would rival some of the so called "real" artists, and I would rather buy that and hang it on my wall. So I really think it is all on point of view. :}

sorry to say, but everyone is an artist.

I think there is just different degrees

"you should probably kill yourself because you suck at art" artist
horrible artist
sucky artist
halfass artist
alright artist
good artist
great artist

and so on....


and so on.

And then there is...Kasha. Who is a terrific,talented artist (AND shes a TECKsus gal)

lol poppa, thanks but I consider myself half-assed.

oh yeah to KINDA answer your question. I used refrences for some of my portraits. I would still like to think of myself as an artist but not as good when I DONT use a reference. It's always nice to create your own shit. People love it and your own creations always come out to be your best pieces.

You are certainly a great artist missy. No question. I am sure I am not alone in this opinion , either.

blah blah blah blah blah you're so great, talented, blah.

if only life was so simple

Lol two...

I think I would put my self in the half assed also. :}

If you guys are half-assed, then I should be in the "I should kill myself because I suck at art" category. Bai.

i think it pretty much only matters if you take yourself too seriously. and dan and dba..wtf are you guys the tag team bullies of 2draw or what?

That appears to be the case.
Kasie and Mike you are so not half-ass.
I don't consider myself an artist. I love art and use drawing as a release from the stress of day to day living. I am not passionate about what I do but I like to do it. As to the question of does making an image make someone an artist I would have to say no. An artist, in my opinion is someone who is passionate about the art they create (be that painting, sculpting, music etc.). You can be skilled but not have any feeling for what you do.

Ok let me get this straight. Someone asks what's the definition of and artist, I post it, they jump up my ass for it, one of my friends notices and points out how stupid it was for that person to jump up my ass, I see all of this and jump up their ass back and I'm a bully. Umm...ok.

LOL!!!!

actually all I said was one sentence, at the end of a post with a couple short paragraphs, and directed toward everyone in general. A few people decided to focus just on that one sentence and took things off track, which frusterated me, so I said why I had written that one sentence. Things just kept going from there, and until sincity happened by everyone forgot what the topic of discussion was about. I still, and not simply because of the pronunciation part, feel that when someone asks a thoughtful question and someone else, right after saying how that it doesn't matter, posts an entire entry from the dictionary that it is patronizing and really doesn't add anything useful. In reality I know I'm a sensitive person, but I think you're far more sensitive. Really, I don't see any need for you to start swearing at me, and you jumped on me for something much more harshly than I had jumped on you.

besides, since I had sent you a memo several weeks ago trying to be friendly and get to know the people here and you completely ignored me, and your title of "asshole" on your userpage which gives the impression that you think it's funny, I already thought of you as being a rude person. If you're not, I haven't seen otherwise yet. It's very possible I reacted wrong, I'm just telling you what I thought and why I thought it.

Hey, don't worry about it ok? I wasn't trying to be an ass to you. It was a misunderstanding thats all. Sometimes I am an asshole, just so happens I wasnt trying to be one when I posted the definition. Forget about it. Draw something.

Okay, and again I'm sorry for misunderstanding you. I can see how you may not have meant it the way I saw it now.

Well thank goodness you all ironed that out. :}

this was a lovely way to waste my morning coffee sips... im gonna go watch CNN now and hear about how the world is stealing destroying lieing argueing covering-up and killing, i will learn how to LIVE WITH IT, through the newscasters smiles... -RYB-

yes, we all know how fucked up the world is. There really isn't a need to watch the news though. Our lives will forever be tainted with sins. We can pretend that we matter in the world and try to make a difference, or we can shut the fuck up and draw.

Heh. Things definately got off subject. ;o)
Dan, you aren't a bully but as you said maybe you can be an ass. I'm not hatin ya. Some people are just like that. We all have flaws. Some are just more up front.
RYB. turn off CNN and draw. hehe you'd be better off.

I've followed this thread for a couple days, now I'll answer the question. It's my opinion that anyone who makes any kind of art.. good, bad or in between (and that's all a matter of opinon, as well) .. is an artist.

I think an artist should have some level of skill, and it can be unorthodox in understanding (the aforementioned a line on paper). I think an artist should live, love and breathe art. Without those other components, anyone can call themselves an artist. To make art anyone can do. To BE art is entirely different.

Wouldn't one need to have an understanding of what ART is? I know there is a dictionary definition, but I am talking about what IS art. Who can say what each of us experiences when we look at something. Art can be anything that makes one have some kind of reaction: a feeling , an impression, a memory, an emotion. This is very much like the discussion of whether we think rap is a form of music , or not. Obviously, to many, it is, and it is just shouting to others. Art can be that way. Some only like classical, or realistic looking work, some like fantasies, some like abstracts and the like. Who is to say that the experience one has looking at an Andy Wharhol, or a Roy Lichtenstien (sp?) , is not the same that another might have looking at the Mona Lisa. My point is that if art , itself, is that varied, then who is to say the person who creates a particular piece is, or is not an artist in that sense.

If I pick up a drumstick and tap on a drum head, am I now a musician? If I write a grocery list, am I now a writer? If I draw a line on a piece of paper am I now an artist? No. This isn't a five year olds birthday party where they work it out so everyone gets a prize. I can rebuild VW engines but when someone asks if I'm a mechanic the answer is 'no I just mess around in my garage'. I've framed and finished the basement but if someone asks if I'm a carpenter again the answer is no. If some kid brings home a fingerpainting they did at school and mom tapes it to the fridge, this does not qualify them as being an artist nor does it qualify or disqualify the fingerpainting from being art in the broadest sense of the word. If you call yourself and you walk like one and talk like one and taste like one, I'd say you are one. But if I look at your art there is something inside that tells me, me personaly, yes, this person is an artist, or no, this person is bullshitting themselves.

You took the words out of my mouth.
The only thing I can add is that when someone has a passion for something they will be skilled at it (or most deffinately on their way).

That's very well put, Axil. I had the same feeling but hadn't thought of it in those terms.

I agree with all that. I was speaking to the diversity. As an example, Cristo. to some, what he does in draping geographical features with fabrics, is art. It isn't to me, but that just means that I don't understand what he is trying to accomplish, and don't see it as art. He is an artist to some, or he wouldn't be allowed to do what he does on such a grand scale,nor would there be any reaction to his works. The point being, that different people might consider someone an artist , or not an artist based on how the work is perceived.

davincipoppalag- Well let's look at it this way for a moment; Both from my own experience and from what we've been learning in my classes art is literally a visual language. It's a form of communication expressed through images. It can be flexible like spoken langauge too since there can be narritive paintings, fictional paintings, poetic or lyrical art that explores lines and colors the way poetry can explore words and sounds, etc. So in that sense I think that you can say anything that's an image and expresses something is art. A random line made on paper may not have even been intended as art or as an expression but it can still be an unintentional expression of that person's mood at that moment just as much as a groan or a random word. So to me it's really a question of does art have to be intentional or can it be accidental. If you could describe art as not needing to be consciously intentional then maybe you could describe anyone that makes art as a sense of being an artist just like anyone who speaks a language could be called a speaker of that langauge, whether or not they're good with words or have a nice sounding voice. Just a thought I'm throwing out there.

I guess it just doesn't seem important to me in the overall scheme of things. One man's art is another man's crap.

redpanda, axil: good points.
Comfort is human. Sharing is humanity. Creating a home of comfort and sharing it with others is creating art. Art is a human second nature.
But on the other hand notice that thoughts of avoidance are not art. So when you say someone is not an artist it really can not help the meaning of art it can only deal with personal characteristics.
Mainly the problem of art is that the world we live in is all about want. So you see a painting of a girl and you like it and you say 'oh cool how awesome i like your style' and this means nothing just as saying someone is an artist means nothing. This is probably why Kasha was disturbed by this subject, because all she paints is pictures of girls. Back to the subject once more: Therefore one must remain silent unless you commit ultimate sin of want, the want of knowledge and language.

two-na. Ok seriously, you do know that what you just wrote up there is quite possibly the most contrived, disjointed, inaccurate statement ever written right? I mean, "Creating a home of comfort and sharing it with others is creating art" what? And pain is as human or even more human than comfort. Sharring is but a fraction of the quality or state of being human. "Thoughts of avoidance"? what? "So when you say someone is not an artist it really can not help the meaning of art." Ummm....help the meaning of art....oooookaaayyyy. So if I tell a baker that he or she is not a jet pilot it really can not help the....uh....meaning of....piloting a jet? what the hell? Some people are artists and some people are not. So what? as for the last part of your statement...."Therefore one must remain silent unless you commit ultimate sin of want, the want of knowledge and language." Ok so....you have to be quiet unless you commit this big sin which is the sin of wanting knowlege and talking? Please tell me you were loaded when you wrote this.

well my personal take on the part about creating a home of comfort and sharing it with others is that it's intuitive. Most things I can think of at the moment, in between bites of this garlic bread, can either be classified as an art or a science. Consider art as intuitive (art, music, martial arts, literature, etc.) and made through human intuition and all other things (math, science, engineering, etc.) as analytical. Since comfort is largely intuitive (although you can break down ideal proportions and such it's not necessary to do so in order to feel the comfort) the act of creating a space of comfort could be called an art. In that sense a painting is a miniturized, limited dimension space of comfort (or discomfort, depending on the intent of the artist). Maybe that wasn't his point, but that was how I read it.

Hmmm yes, very interesting. And lets also consider how the plane of balance is formed not only of two angles but that the lubricant of time must also consider how one might convey how to deal with a certain logical exprssion of human dealing in that the control factor is largely second nature for the artist in that he deals primarily with creating a nice room for other people. LOL

You so just made that up... XP

Hmmm, yes you could say that I made it up. But on the other hand you have to consider the want of knowlege and language as being the ultimate sin so that we can help the meaning of art because it needs help, this meaning of art does. Which is a quality of thoughts of avoidance due to wax build up on the soul of humanity.

axil, try to imagine that pain only exists because of choice no more than it is a choice--then you will know what I mean. Redpanda, that's exactly what I meant.

Ah yes of course, how did I miss it? Pain in itself is something but that the choice is no more something than it was when it wasn't something as if it were when it was as choice is to thought when pain wasn't a choice but rather no more than a big fat log roll.

I can't believe I'm reading this stuff..

I am going to snidely call everyone in this thread an "artiste" because I'm edgy to the extreme edge xtremedgeXjudcnuuvkjjkdspopculture

hahaha.. Dan. :-D

In the greek language artist means a creator of beauty.
Elements that make an artist better than others or himself later in time are commonly known, like natural talent, practice, studying and a love for art among many others. However every person judges an artist's skill in a different way. According to a person an artist might be good and according to another person the same artist can be bad.
For me, a sexy drawing that makes me aroused and excited is definately a work of art. >;)
Mr. Red Panda, do you like tongue twisters? I love them. >:)
SAYONARA GAMMERA! >:D
|XOD|

two-na:
lol, wait, when was I disturbed by this subject? My intention was to be silly and not to be taken seriously. Umm... and why would I be disturbed by this subject because I only paint pictures of girls? wait, since when do I only paint pictures of girls? You're so sure becasue you see what I paint offline? Think again. I'm not sure if I should be offended or not but I just had to correct you on that little theory you had there involving me.

just to throw out there: I don't paint what I expect people to like, it's a plus whenever they appreciate what I've created, but I don't thrive on comments or acceptance. I do it for myself and solely for myself. Bye

yes, everything you do is for yourself including ignoring people.

Kudos to redpanda and those who make an attempt to discuss something on a sincere level, and not slip on to the slippery (and unfortunately stylish) slope of detached irony!