Note: To protect the privacy of our members, e-mail addresses have been removed from the archived messages. As a result, some links may be broken.
> "Are kids real artists?"
> I think the unasked question there is,"Is this kid going to grow up to be
> an artist?"
> The response that I'll always recall is once a kid answered, "I'm an
> artist NOW!"
I like this. Would that most of us could retain this assurance and
participation in art, in THE arts throughout our lives.
Forget about becoming a "Professional Artist" or a "Great Artist",
hobnobbing with the rich and famous and an aquaintance of every gallery or
museum director on the planet; or, for that matter, even a wannabe pro, a
gifted amateur, or a dilettante. Certainly as a career it is an honorable
and justified goal. I keep trying myself, but an annual income (as yet) it
I mean rather as a way of living, a way of encountering life... A way of
experiencing and responding or relating. Something more "significant"
some how than simply "consuming" products or entertainments.
I have no profound arguments with those who want to teach cultural
literacy. Hirsch makes some excellent points along the way. I'm just
working out an argument for more of a personal/folk tradition in art than
either of the more familiar traditions of a pop art or high art.
Don't you think we tend to ignore the possibility of our own particiation
in a folk tradition of art and assign that role to more exotic, more
naive and innocent "others"? I think so and I also think we are possibly
missing something in our ignorance.
Don't you suspect that if more of "us" were players in the art game, if
we had some personal involvement or commitment to art, that we as a culture
might be more supportive of "The Arts" in general?