Wednesday, March 26, 2008


the more i think about it, the more i think that art is just for the artist- but not in that way. that egotistical, cathartic, bleeding heart all over my shoes kind of way. it can be, if that is the artist, but i think most viewers have a hard time looking at such art unless they are hardcore voyeurs. 

art can be for politics, for the renaissance, for friends, for beer... but ultimately, it's to satisfy some curiosity in the artist and some selfish desire to see it manifested. 

[dude, i'm sitting here watching the Today show, and i really want to humiliate all of these people in some way... they seem so happy in their average little cages. i want to see Jerry springer bring his 3 ring circus in here...]

that's my personal curiosity. but i also wonder if we all lived in a world of artists would anyone care. if we were all making art to satisfy our own itches, what would a world of itches look like?


i've stopped trying to make sense :]

1 comment:

Gary said...

As the art is getting made, it has a purpose for the artist--both internal and external. Once it's tangible, it's purpose if at some point and forever out of the artist's hands. Like an adolescent, if it's been well-trained and loved, it will usually be fine and actually grow into more than the artist ever thought it would. That's how life goes.