Only a trivial artist will get off on hearing, oh, oh, you're so good, you're so awesome. Tell the artist what you see because it won't be the same thing as the artist saw in creating this thing so what did it bring to you.
When I called my father's paintings 'interesting,' it was the kiss of death. Sometimes he would slash them, thus ensuring yet another lifetime trauma, but I love that crazy ol' coot. He didn't talk about anything, he would just fookin' do it.
If the artist hears you thought about the work enough to have some comments on it, I positively ga-ron tee you will never have a problem in divulging them. So, you saw what, you say?? Wow. How about that.
When I called my father's paintings 'interesting,' it was the kiss of death. Sometimes he would slash them, thus ensuring yet another lifetime trauma, but I love that crazy ol' coot. He didn't talk about anything, he would just fookin' do it.
If the artist hears you thought about the work enough to have some comments on it, I positively ga-ron tee you will never have a problem in divulging them. So, you saw what, you say?? Wow. How about that.
The artist only knows what this thing creates in himself or herself but also knows there's no way of seeing what it brings to you. Serious. You can't go wrong in showing interest in anything.
In a highly-indirect way, my ol' Dad was teaching me the lesson as above since I could see the destructiveness of calling a painting 'interesting' but I really didn't immediately get why. Is this just crazy emotionalism, all artists do this, wtf, wtf??
From that it came, everyone is an artist but most don't paint and instead do it in other ways. 'Interesting' is probably deadly for a critique of anything from a painted work to cake at the county fair.
There's always the most obvious way to kill any work of art, tho: call it awesome.
There's always the most obvious way to kill any work of art, tho: call it awesome.
No comments:
Post a Comment