Can someone do art with Playmobil? & What is art?

[Gustavo]

...  In America, a lot of "art" nowadays is either political propaganda or a navel-gazing 20-something ranting poetry that expresses his/her grievances.

Does this happen in the part of America you are too??? 'Cause it happens here a lot!!!

It's very awkward when a friend comes by, asks you to read his poems, and asks you what you think about them, because, most of the times, it's very common expression of feelings ... I do this a lot!, but this is definitely the part of my writings I'd not consider any kind of art! ... It's only expression of feelings. (...)

As for the my failed artist comment:

By "Lego draws the blunt-speaking, misfit engineers; Playmobil draws the failed artists", I was trying to be funny.   

It's great to find thoughts you always had to find form ... As Richard said, there's a lot of things in common between us in here, and whenever something so fertile like this comes up, it's wonderful to chat about!

I have to add, however, that, if it touches so many of us, it's because, one way or another, we have heard this before ... And, in my case, not as a joke!

G.

[Gustavo]

Some related links to start things off:

Yann Delacour interview

...

Weird interview, the one of this Delacour guy ... He sounds a bit like a mercenary!

G.

[Knightmo]

Wow.



I guess I dont travel in nearly as colorful of places as you all do. I dont understand some of the stuff you all are saying. I consider myself an artist and I have a very artistic family. Success in the use of my art has not come in the form of monetary gain, but rather in what it can do for myself and others on a more signifcant level. It helps me hash out my thoughts and inspire me. More importantly though, I think success comes from bringing joy to others.

I have never come across the negative stuff mentioned(or I just dont recognize the jargon used). If I have, I guess I never for moment considered it even worthy of my ponderings. I guess there is such a thing as lousy art, selfishly motivated art, and deliberately destructive art.--We humans tend to do that sort of thing.

Just because we may not immediately--or maybe ever--recognize what we are looking at, it was born out of someones mind to tell a story, make a statement, or whatever. Art is indeed subjective. I recommend not wasting too much time and emotion on the bad stuff and spend plenty of time on appreciating the good.

[CountBogro]

But some great artists were only appreciated after their death. Both Van Gogh and Rembrandt died paupers, while after their deaths their art was sold for millions or even more.

If I saw something that I can't apprciate, I'll (try) and to walk on. Not to judge anything; but just go on to the pieces I can appreciate and enjoy those...

Bogro

[Richard]

... Art is indeed subjective. I recommend not wasting too much time and emotion on the bad stuff and spend plenty of time on appreciating the good.

Well said, Jimmy!  ... 

And, Bogro ... there seems to be a certain perversity that many of us humans have ... sometimes we appear to have more appreciation for those things that we have lost, can't have, or were taken away from us. (IE: People willing to pay large sums of money for Playmobil from their youth. And, remember the Bible story of the lost drachma.) ... 

All the best.
Richard

[Gustavo]

I guess I dont travel in nearly as colorful of places as you all do. I dont understand some of the stuff you all are saying. I consider myself an artist and I have a very artistic family. Success in the use of my art has not come in the form of monetary gain, but rather in what it can do for myself and others on a more signifcant level. It helps me hash out my thoughts and inspire me. More importantly though, I think success comes from bringing joy to others.

I have never come across the negative stuff mentioned ...

I guess it's got to do with a delicate matter of doing something for living oposed to a secret of living for doing something that I have to admit that I've been letting aside ... Daily rush deceives a man very easily.

Great to talk with you all, though! Many opinions help to bring back good thought & sense about different subjects!

Is Hans Beck an artist?

see attachment ("borowed" from Tricorne Jack)

Both Van Gogh and Rembrandt died paupers

Hans Beck was an artist I think (though he probably considered himself a designer)

thoughts, thoughts

Art portrays the present; present not always is easily understood
Art and the artist who produces it may have different endings, or
The artist and his art may have different endings

There's no art without craft
There is creation without craft
Craft involves creation, but not creation of something new necessarily

An artist may not be intending to make art, when he's simply doing his ... craft


G.
 

[Gustavo]

more thoughts

When an artist is doing craft, he isn't an artist to his own eye

Sometimes, art will be ellected by the world

Rembrandt died pauper because he bought a lot of Playmobil!

 

[Rasputin]

Well if one needed to stir up a little creativity you could allways take a few shots of the " Green Fairy " (Absinthe)

That should get the ol art ball rollin 

[Timotheos]

Weird interview, the one of this Delacour guy ... He sounds a bit like a mercenary!

G.

I read the Delacour article and was amazed / impressed that Playmobil cooperates.  Considering other public art projects (mentioned in "Story of a Smile") that Playmobil has been drawn into, it says something about the "iconic" look / affect of the toy.  On the other hand, why Delacour needs 700 more yankees... I admire Geobra for playing along...  Interesting that Delacour mentioned the dating analogy...  the art of the conquest...?  The double entendre of "yankee" meaning both war against slavery and a nickname for the present American international presence I guess adds "depth" to his project.

As for art definition:

It seems "modern art" (whether abstract or not) requires a raison d'etre, a "narrative" if you please (cynically: a sales spin). 

When Van Gogh was painting one of his fields, did he console himself by saying it symbolized the vast fields of Africa, lush yet painted, vibrant yet flat, nourished yet starving?

It's the sales spin that creates the aura of mysticism that surrounds modern art makers.  They aren't creating "things that are interesting"--nay!  Such a description befits a boor.  They're "devising introspections into post-modern subtextualization."

And, besides, you have to differentiate yourself in the market somewhere.  Person A and Person B have both produced an "interesting" photograph.  Yet, Person A gave us merely a snapshot, a jejune mish-mosh of childhood items set against an industrial background--while Person B--Oh Gods, look down!--gave us "morals, arrayed and fitted into rank and file--not 300, nay, no Thermopylaean martyrdom, but a 700 strong regiment of plastic, industrial men--post capitalist, yet pre-colonial, anti-slave, yet enslaving (look north, not south, for freedom, self-rule; General Lee is a car in the Dukes of Hazzard, a comedy).  And to what god?  What muse? 

Oh great and wonderful Charisma!

   
 

   

[Timotheos]

More on the subject:

The notion that art involves a degree of personal investment (which craft lacks) is a standard I see a lot.

Yet--

We have a great deal of art work that survives from classical and medieval times, and it isn't possible to discern the motives behind the artist.  In truth, even today, short of what the artist says for himself, you have no way of knowing how "genuine / sincere" the work is.

Bob Dylan raised a storm a few years back by saying he'd written his songs "for the money" (ie. writing to his audience's desire instead of speaking from the heart).

And what does that mean?

Why does it matter?

It seems many people seek to buy a personal relationship with the artist--

(this may apply mainly to music and contemporary literature-- )

To feel like somebody "knows" them--

So, I guess "art" can be a sort of communications--

"Lost ships at sea seeking a light house"

Otherwise, it shouldn't matter whether a machine randomly generates images / words that its audience finds it relates to, or whether there is a bold mind fashioning X from his heart.

A professor a few years back created a computer program to communicate with people.  He designed it to mostly rephrase what the person told it, somewhat like how an empathetic listener operates.

Ex:

A: "I feel bad."
Computer: "You feel bad?  Why?"
"Because people don't take me seriously."
"They don't take you seriously?"
"No.  They call me a flake."
"They call you a flake?"
"Yes.  Because I get so emotional."
"You get so emotional?"
...
and so on.

He found that people got so involved with that random program, thinking it was trully listening, that he stopped using it on people and considered it unethical.

So the question is:

What is meaning, anyway?