Цитата:
Сообщение от Marta
I think the "real" artist or not does not depend on its way of life (propensity for publicity or seclusion), and even from his state of mind (if he has a dream, obsession, etc.), and only on the result of his work.
If it is clear that the work of professional, that invested in its creation of emotional and /or intellectual powers (not just the result of professional waste "manufacturing" process), then the artist is quite real.
|
Sovershenno soglasen!
Added after 1 minutes
Цитата:
Сообщение от artcol
I will propose his own version of PC (it is very short):
HX - X is the one who knows what does and (therefore) is responsible for what he does.
Ie chief criterion nastoyaschnosti is seriousness in relation to their work.
|
Ochen 'rad, chto vy tak dumaete.
Added after 3 minutes
Цитата:
Сообщение от Buscador
For me a good (real), the artist - is primarily a specialist, speaks perfect their profession (nobody argues. That is a profession). Here I see an objective factor. And then flights of fantasy and the like - as a subjective factor. Good - one that can do well, what should be done by a professional.
|
Spasibo, eto prakticheski sovpadaet s moim mneniem.
Added after 7 minutes
Sozdaiotsia vpechatlenie, chto my prihodim k obschemu znamenateliu v opredelenii nastoiaschego hudoznika.
Dlia tehniki est 'riad kriteriev ob'ektivnoi otsenki. Ishodia iz etogo, kolichestvo "nastoiaschih" hudoznikov znachitel'no umen'shitsia. V kavychki ia eto vzial, potomu, chto naprimer iz 250,000, zaregistrirovannyh hudoznikov v Au, pol'zuias' daze nastoiaschim, nesovershennym opredeleniem, uidiot v nebytiio protsentov 80-90.
A eto uze blize k istine.