<REALISM> Appendix to hopeless dispute
Edward
Embarrassment is growing.
I haven't noticed that anyone wrote that art can only exist within
academic style, and whatever does not fall into strict presets of
academic school is NOT an ART.
No?... Good. Because it is not true. And people clinging to this
erroneous viewpoint
are abnormally arrogant or/and terribly doctrined beyond the point.
Conception of art and its manifestations, as we all know, are too
complex just to stay within academically-proven realistic approach.
(but that's another line).
And, yet I absolutely agree with slogan: "NO SKILLS - NO ART" !!!
Not that I just agree with that (because, after all, I am nobody), but
strangely enough it is 100% true statement.
Actually, this subject had been chewed up million of times as well and,
as I naively
believed, it had been already swallowed and irrevocably digested.
But here we are again: some doubts about skills-no-skills issue are
popping up.
To put it briefly:
there is NO OTHER WAY BUT one that goes through ultimate skills and
truly "master level" of most tedious (as it might seem for some
sceptical & lazy people) academic
technique.
Whether this is
- a way laid to perfection (in craft and art and a way of earning for
living); or
- the way of cognition (because art is tool and way by and through one
learns the world and the whole universe - if you like); or
- an ultimate path to self-expression and , thereby further development;
or
- way to achieving social goals (for very practical people); or
- way of reasoning, thinking, developing or backing up one's conceptions
and visions ...
etc. etc.
NOTHING was ever done in anything & anywhere, just by sheer luck,
bully-like attitude, ignorance and arrogance, with baseness of most
essential skills...
Well, a lot of shit actually has happened and done this way (if we look
at the world around us) and even more to come,
but I meant - NOTHING WORTHY was produced by careless priggish
amateurs...
We all know that incompetence can be very successful: a whole legion of
pricks (by bullshitting, showing off, lying, brown-nosing, cheating,
schmoozing) make their way thorough. So what? Does it give anyone any
REAL credit? Hardly.
However gifted or talented a person can be - sooner or later this person
comes to the point when technical skills are required. Musicians,
artists, writers - everyone sooner or later comes to understanding of
necessity to get strong background with help of good teachers
(preferably), to obtain relevant knowledge and to broaden and enrich
skills....
There can be no progress in ANY STYLE or GENRE without a proper "school"
behind.
Perfect example is French impressionists: none of them liked acedemism
in technique, romanticism, any realism, or just salon painting, and yet
most of them graduated from the same French academy of Arts.
And, only when they learned the best of the best, they were able to
produce something NEW and POWERFUL.
Etc... etc...
And of course there are many people who want to jump start - and
straight into perfection, no lectures, no heavy books, no long hours
spent on studying anything - here I am a great artist because I love to
smear yellow over red background and I feel it's wonderful product of
highly advanced creative process..."
- Yeah, yeah....
And those who do not understand (or at least try to), and who stubbornly
reject the very experience and knowledge of generations and who are
really believe in great talent and own exclusive capabilities, not
powered by knowledge or substantiated by skills - those are doomed.
For just as there are no limits for perfection,
there are no limits for inventiveness with which the mediocrity excuses
itself and pampers own squalor and dinginess...
<Sapienti sat...>
-= EDWARD =-