I have been meaning to write for a while now. But translating gobbledygook into englees.. well, it's tough! But do you see me giving up? No. Of course, when you see me give up, you probably won't see me (give up).
Ok, coming to the pointlessness ... I'm just trying to put my thoughts into perspective here.. and i accept that i fall prey to what i'm against too ..but i don't quite understand why people try to explain their art...and why other people are suckers for the explanation. The work will speak for itself (and probably make people speak about it too) if it is good. And if it isn't, the explanations just make it annoying. Why would one want to back up a below average piece of art...or even a truely brilliant piece for that matter... with fancy words? Any kind of visual art has several meanings...probably as many as the number of people who see it. A few words from the artist to lead the audience to his general thoughts are ok..but confining the creation to a particular idea only does gross injustice to it.
The same logic would apply (almost as strictly) when this is viewed the other way round. Making up for bad writing with a picture flicked off the net...or using a picture to add on to an already great work. Why fix a picture in the minds of the readers when they can otherwise draw much more beautiful and more fluid pictures in their minds with those words alone?
When i see or read something it becomes mine - in the sense that i can choose to view it in any form i like... and draw my own conclusions...or just ponder over it aimlessly...that is, in either case, exercise my mind.
If both mediums are used together, they inhibit the viewer's creativity...and one of them, therefore, is redundant.
Redundant creativity - now that's a scary thought!
I am done for the day. Good night !
Ok, coming to the pointlessness ... I'm just trying to put my thoughts into perspective here.. and i accept that i fall prey to what i'm against too ..but i don't quite understand why people try to explain their art...and why other people are suckers for the explanation. The work will speak for itself (and probably make people speak about it too) if it is good. And if it isn't, the explanations just make it annoying. Why would one want to back up a below average piece of art...or even a truely brilliant piece for that matter... with fancy words? Any kind of visual art has several meanings...probably as many as the number of people who see it. A few words from the artist to lead the audience to his general thoughts are ok..but confining the creation to a particular idea only does gross injustice to it.
The same logic would apply (almost as strictly) when this is viewed the other way round. Making up for bad writing with a picture flicked off the net...or using a picture to add on to an already great work. Why fix a picture in the minds of the readers when they can otherwise draw much more beautiful and more fluid pictures in their minds with those words alone?
When i see or read something it becomes mine - in the sense that i can choose to view it in any form i like... and draw my own conclusions...or just ponder over it aimlessly...that is, in either case, exercise my mind.
If both mediums are used together, they inhibit the viewer's creativity...and one of them, therefore, is redundant.
Redundant creativity - now that's a scary thought!
I am done for the day. Good night !
10 comments:
what are all these new gadgets you have uploaded here?? you are becoming as bad as my prof pathak!
}:-)
Ummm.. provoking!!
what else i can say!!
I also think in a similar way!
Smileys can be used to express the expression as a form of art..
p.s.: u hv got some trouble with the sharing codes.. linkedin with Twitter
and what not..
Just the right post for what I actually came to tell you.
My office 'photography club'* informed us about this. Thought you might love to take part:
http://canvera.com/betterphotography/
(scroll over particuar contest icon (there are 3) and cick 'know more' to know about that particular one
*for now thats a joke, at least for me. We have just formed a cub of 40 members.
So far it has organised some paid voluntary photographyclass of 2-3 days with a photographer whose photos I found not so pretty and so did not attend (If find some of mine and many of yours to be prettier than that professional photographers :P, and and it has organised a paid voluntary class for photoshop, which I did not attend due to other commitments.
Finally! You're back! Whoot! :D
woohoo! you're back with a pop!!
gyaan kabhi nonsensical nahi hota bachi :)
about the post..if the author's posted picture restricts you from letting your imagination run wild, isn't that feebleness on the reader's part?
@ tinni: but i'm not asking you to make assignments on those things ! :P
most of them are from the templates i was trying out.
@ abhinav: oh yus! smileys can beat almost everything :P
those codes came from some of the templates i had tried out earlier..i'll probably remove them.
@ sia: thanks! lol. i was never away. glad to see you.
@ swati: yus, i'd thought about that too. most of the time it's easy for me to imagine other things ..but sometimes..or at some point, the picture still stops other thoughts. maybe that's where my creativity stops ... [does this explain why some readers are just readers? (??)]
would anyone like to uselessly use all their energy to pick up a spoon even though they can use just 2 fingers to pick it up ? would someone purposely solve a maths problem using calculus when they know it takes a few steps of simple arithmetic? ...so..in the same way, why complicate the process of imagination when it comes easily/naturally? keeping things simple is always a better option.
@ stupid: haww, tumko to bhool hi gaye upar wale comment mey. :P
thanks !! i saw the link. am searching through my archives for suitable pictures.
(about the classes)-- haha! goes to show that people's degrees are all that matter.
Wow, a very impressive post indeed! Am tempted to also call it 'deep', but am afraid that should not be taken as insincere.
Anyway, sometimes I do venture out to explain what were my ideas behind any creation - say, a work of fiction or poetry. But I would assume that by the time I communicate with my readers, they would have already enjoyed and interpreted whatever was to be interpreted.
So, I wouldn't think that my explanation would distort or limit their interpretation of my work as all that would have already happened. Why I do this is because I would want the reader to be able to 'see' exactly what I had been able to see.
Art is also a form of communication. And just like day-to-day verbal communication, there can be misunderstandings or 'losses in translation'.
My 'art' is for my pleasure, but sometimes a part of that pleasure derives from knowledge of what feelings/emotions did 'it' invoke in those I value for some reasons. And for for knowing the emotions evoked by 'it', 'it' has to be understood as accurately as possible. Hence, I would venture out to explain what EXACTLY had I meant to convey through my art.
I usually don't include pics in my posts. Largely because of copyright issues. And secondly, I would feel a certain discomfort if any portion of MY post would not be MY creation. :)
Blogrolled you!
Take care.
PS: Was pleasantly surprised by the profundity of this post, especially when compared to what impression I had formed when I visited your blog last (very long back).
@ ketan: hmm.. everything thinks differently. nice to know your's.
thanks for the blogroll! will visit you sometime!
i'm extremely random - and i have a whole (one-line) post on it. here : http://hydrogenpops.blogspot.com/2009/11/hmm.html
Post a Comment