Artists and Improvement

In response to Mary's post question. " My question right now is what is an artist to do once they have reached the peak of their performance and can no longer improve?"
I think that artists can never really reach that point where there is no room for improvement. There are so many different art styles and emotions to experiment with and perfect that it is impossible to perfect them all in the short period of time we have to live. If an artist truly reaches the peak of their performance then they will probably make a lot of money. There are exceptions to that obviously if a person is handicapped and cannot improve then, because society would most likely be understanding towards that individual, but otherwise people are genetically designed to adapt and improve.
Question: What do you think?

Pressure on famous artists

I m responding to chelsea's post question. Her question is :Do you think famous artists produce better or worse work because of the pressures on them to keep being great?
I think that all depends on the person producing the art. Some people buckle under pressure and cannot achieve what is expected of them. Where others would over-achieve and excel under pressure. I believe that some of the greatest works of art are created because artists are expressing themselves whether people will like it or not and it has meaning. When artists become famous, they can still express themselves through the art, but they have more motivation to give people what they want, instead of creating something that came from their soul. On the other hand, I think that famous artists are motivated to try harder to produce good work. my point was when artists have this pressure pushed on them, they will not always be able to create good works of art, even if they do try harder. Like when some people take tests and they forget all the answers even though they studied for hours because there is so much pressure to do well.
Question: do you agree that artists create better work a majority of the time, when they are just expressing themselves, instead of trying to make money?

Hamster

Why are we greedy?

This is in response to Nicole B.'s question on one of her posts. The question is :Why are we biologically and psychologically greedy and envious creatures?
My answer is that we are greedy and envious because it makes sense to be. Many people on average, want to be successful. I do no think there is one person that has made it through life without looking at something and wanting it, whether that something was a new car or a better figure. We want things because we believe that if we have them, we can lead a happier life. Commercials do not help us with this issue. In advertising, you see a person running on the beach with all their friends, and then as their laughing and having a good time, you see one of them pick up a drink. the whole message this commercial conveys is that if you buy the drink you can be happy like the people in the commercial. Many people in society may not be able to afford the drink, but that does not stop them from wanting it. I think that in some cases being "greedy" is healthy. Greedy being defined as wanting something. When you want something bad enough you are motivated to get things done to get that something.
question: Can greed be a good thing?

Food time!

In America, the average family is expected to eat three meals a day. Sometimes I wonder why we do this. Like whether we are truly hungry at dinner time, or whether we just think we are hungry around dinner because we have been raised to believe that dinner time is when we need to eat. So I am basically wondering whether our brain is telling us to eat based on our schedule, or if we are truly hungry. This article :http://ezinearticles.com/?Eating-3-Meals-a-Day-Helps-to-Keep-You-in-Shape&id=1554214 says that it is bad not to eat three meals a day because your body stores calories and conserves energy, so the less time you take to eat the more weight you can gain because your metabolism goes down. Part of the reason people say not to eat the smaller meals six times a day is because your body will not conserve any energy or calories. That means if you skip a meal, chances are you will not feel good.
Do you think it is a good idea to eat three meals a day? or do you have a different eating schedule?

Traditions and society

This is in response to Nicole's blog. The question is "Do you think rituals and traditions of other cultures should be tossed aside because we find them amoral? Or is our perception of morality simply too rigid?"

Personally, I think that our society shuns things it does not understand. If a tradition exists that does not agree with our traditions, then we do not approve of it. We try to change it or get rid of it. A good example is of the Christmas tree. I have always known it as a Christmas tree, but when I was in high school there was controversy over whether it should rightfully be called a Christmas tree or not. Some said it was offensive because the name was not sensitive towards other religions. People will always be bothered by some sort of tradition if it does not cohere to their own beliefs. I do not think it is okay that this happens and i wish it were not the case, but wishing alone cannot change the way the world is. I think that everyone should be able to believe what they would like to as long as it is not dangerous or harmful to other individuals or themselves, without others getting involved and telling them that they can't believe that. I think that having people live life differently from the way we do enables us to experience different trains of thought and allows for us to open our minds more to the world.
What is a tradition of another culture that you find particularly interesting?

Are rare things more appealing to society?

im wondering if the fact that something is rare makes it that much more desirable to society. A couple classes ago, we talked about music and how more people would choose to go to a concert than buy the music on itunes. The point was made that if you go to a concert you get to experience the atmosphere that comes with the concert which you couldn't do if you bought a CD. my question is whether concerts would be just as popular if they were as accessible and convenient as music on your ipod would be? or to generalize the question, does that fact that you can never have the same experience again with certain things( like concerts), make them more appealing to society?

Some art that i like....

I like alot of different art. here is some stuff i found to give people a taste of what i like and why. I put the pics on here with links to their original sites.

links:1. http://davidlavery.net/Grotesque/Site%20Images/dali33.jpg

2. http://www.wisconsincommonmarket.com/CollaborativeServicesCorporation/itemphotos/A23%20Reapers%20Peepers.jpg

3.http://www.shockya.com/news/wp-content/uploads/alice_mad_hatter_artwork1.jpg

4.http://th169.photobucket.com/albums/u215/Nixchel/th_kissahuggen.jpg

Note: the first pic i talk about is at the bottom of the line because they posted difrent then i thought they would, but im pretty sure from the descriptions i gave you could figure out which one is which.

the first one i chose to put on here, i like because its weird. you really have to think about it, and its something i could stare at for a long time. It also looks like it took time to plan out and create.There are lots of hands coming out of places, and its the kind of thing you wouldn't normally see.

i like the second one because it is very creative. sometimes it is really difficult to come up with things, and let your imagination reach its full potential. i really appreciate being able to see what kind of things other people come up with. A reaper juggling different colored eyes leads to all kinds of questions, but its fun to have to think about them once you see the picture.

the third one i like mainly for its color. I'm not entirely sure whether it was done in paint or on the computer, but i like it because of the detail and color choices. you can see the details in the eyes and its so interesting to see this image in comparison to what we are used to seeing this character depicted as.

the last one i felt like i had to put in this list because it holds key factors in my interest. It falls under the category of anime and i like it because it focuses more on the story line and emotions of the characters involved with it. each artist that does anime studies the human form or another part of nature and then creates their interpretation of it.

So this is some of the art that i like. I'm not picky though. anything that looks colorful or time consuming would probably catch my interest. i love going to museums and looking at all the different things.
Question: Do you like the same kind of art as me? if not, why not? and what kind of art do you like?

In response to andrew's post.....

This is in response to andrew's post on my post. As for the statement on the humans capacity for infinite knowledge, people will never stop trying to learn things. That is the point though. People are constantly seeking knowledge because there is no possible way for them to know everything, therefore their capacity for knowledge is finite because they will never reach the point of infinite knowledge. At least, not unless advancements in today's technology are made. Yes people will always learn until the day they die, but they will never learn it ALL. As far as people trying to learn about something goes, I am not saying to give up on learning new things all together. my point is that i believe you can relate any two objects in some way. If you try to do this your subject will lose substance. Yes, you will know more in general, but as a whole the information you learned wont be very helpful to you. Ex.) you are studying dogs for a research paper. You know that some dogs like parks, and that flowers grow in parks, so you research all the things there are to know about flowers too. If you turn in that paper the teacher is going to give you a bad grade for going off topic, even though you learned alot. this is because even though you were learning, you didnt cut yourself off from all the knowledge you could know and you went to far. I'm not saying that you should just stop learning all together, but simply that there is a time and place to learn specific things, and we don't have time to learn them all.
question: Is the whole reason we think of knowledge as being infinite because we cannot learn it all? is it possible that there is a point where knowledge begins and knowledge ends but we haven't gotten there yet?

So, you got a line on some paper....

This is in response to Matt Visser's post. He asks the question "can art still be considered art if there is just a line drawn on the paper?" My answer is yes. I believe that art can exist as long as someone that created it intended for it to be art. It does not have to be complex or amazing. Now, whether it is GOOD art or not, is another matter completely. I believe that there is an incredible amount of art in the world and some of it I do not like. The fact that i think it is awful does not mean that it stops being art. If you see a car and you say its the ugliest car you have ever seen, it doesn't refute the fact that the car is still a car. Many people are swayed towards some art because it is aesthetically pleasing. I like any kind of art where you can tell that effort was put into it. It doesn't matter to me whether the picture is creepy or morbid, as long as the artist put time into it. If you put a line on a piece of paper intending for it to be art, then it would be.
In some cases the question is harder to answer. In the book an example is given; in Africa, things were made along time ago to serve a purpose. Those objects were not created as art but are considered art by society.
Question: If society views an object as art, does it make that object art?