• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: JackARoe | Cheshire_Kat

Artistry, Attaining External Perspective?

U

Urgez

Bluelighter
Joined
Apr 23, 2011
Messages
67
hi all,

first post here, though i've been a long time reader.

i was curious whether any other musicians, or artists in general frankly, have tackled with the challenge of viewing their art from an outsider's perspective. as a songwriter, i'll listen to my recordings on a seemingly infinite loop, trying to will my mind into an out-of-body (rather out of my own consciousness) experience. i believe i do this, as most others would agree, in an attempt to gauge my true level of talent. seemingly, if an artist could attain such transcendence, he or she would effectively create a personal feedback loop, achieving a level of artistry beyond that of the "typical" artist.

i ask, therefore: is this a holy grail?

there are certain psychoactive substances that seem to help with this, but without the proper mindset any drug will be useless. thoughts? =D
 
Welcome to BL, and to P&S. Good opening thread, I'm unsure whether in belongs here or in one of the two Music discussion threads. We'll leave it here for now and guage the response. Do you think your question is primarily a philosophical one, or a musical one?

PAX

Pythagoras
 
i draw because it gives me time to myself where i dont think. i know to make a line because its second nature.

if im upset or whatever, i draw to get my mind off everything and it seems to leave me and onto the paper.
i dont even care to show anyone else, and could care less about feedback.
 
What you expose yourself to has an effect on how you feel and think.

What you watch, listen to, read, eat, where you are... all of these impact your perception.

Isolation, or even a change in setting can be powerful tools for examining oneself.
 
thanks for the warm welcomes and responses

pax: i believe my question to be about art, perspective and validation though i can see how it's ambiguous. my apologies for the clarity of the question

"a poet never knows their greatest work" / that's the problem no? my first thought is that obviously greatness cannot be determined by the artist himself due to bias. > then the subjectivity of greatness.

but if we were to allow a business model to dictate greatness (as most other industries do), we do in fact discover objective greatness [dictated by popularity, popularity dictated by business >_<]. of course the argument to follow is art created in the cogs of such a machine sacrifices something, likely integrity.

one could also argue that greatness could be judged by experts, critics, those in the know. these experts are probably qualified to make such judgement because they themselves have achieved some level of greatness in their careers (be it through academia or popularity again). if that's the case, it's seemingly no different than the business model making judgement?: success is awarding success, and those of the book earn credentials by studying the success of those past...

[another line of thought]
if we cannot be satisfied with commercial greatness, then we must learn to live with our personal satisfaction. coming back to my original question, i wonder whether there is an existential solution, whether we can will ourselves into a different state from which to judge (as kaywholed pointed out, setting is crucial)

lucid dreams, anyone? :-)
 
P&S it is then. This should hopefully flourish into an interesting thread. IFF it does not, then a change of forum might be a consideration.

Again welcome. Be sure to read the BLUA and the P&S forum guidelines both at the top of the main page. You're off to a flying start.
 
I've contemplated how to see ones art apart from the process of creating as the audience would see it. I think being able to critique your art as a product rather than as your "baby" is probably vital to being able to really refine one's work.

But like being able "to see yourself as others see you" its not easy and your never going to be really sure you accomplished it. Ourselves, our people, our art can probably only be glimpsed as others would glimpse them because our level of investment tends to be very high and something we can only drop for a while.

I think being an instructor might get one in the habit of viewing an area of art critically. Then maybe the habitual critique-er and improvement mindedness towards others would get applied to one's own art just by being a a part of a person's mental routine. In fact really analyzing and appreciating art from many artists likely makes someone good at judging their own art as well.
 
Objective measure for art?

^^
@ ssssssssss

That is certainly true of much art.

I wonder if the cave painters of Lascaux or Chauvet-Pont-d'Arc ever gave a thought to their paintings and how they would communicate through the millennia, to become literally priceless works of art.

What were they trying to achieve in using ochre to depict hunting scenes or the outline of someone's hand.
caveprint.jpg

In this primitive art perhaps we see the true meaning and purpose of art. Investing time to create something new that spoke to their peers, and reached out to their progeny.

Is Art leaving one's imprint (literally and metaphorically)? The artist gives of himself, that others may enjoy, wonder, or marvel, not only in his/her lifetime, but like an indelible mark, cultural graffiti that says 'I was here, and this is part of me, take it (and enrich oneself), or leave it (encouraging cultural decay(?)).

From cave paintings, to the Hagia Sophia, the mysteries of Linear A or the Pyramids of the Giza Plateau. Art is a fundamental cultural construct. Perhaps the measure of art is to 'do your thing, your way', and let History be the judge - a thought that has just come to me now as I write.

Huzzar for dialogical discussions!!

And thank God that æsthetics remains a category of the philosophical canon, yet to be reduced to some mathematical formula (putting aside phi and Pi for a moment).

The OP seems to be searching for some objective measure of his artistic talents - I think this might be a fruitless task given that art is valued and enjoyed due to its qualitative aspect, rather than its quantative aspect..

There also seems to be this nagging split between "so called" High Art and Low Art within the cultural milieu.

I'm waffling now, so I will stop here. I'm still annoyed at myself for having dropped the aesthetics course after the first tutorial, though I transferred to Ancient Philosophy - still an enduring passion.

Perhaps someone could pipe in with a concise propædeutic. I think some reading and thinking is in order for me to proffer advice to answer the OP's question.



αἰσθάνομαι - I sense, I feel
 
Last edited:
i would consider myself as an artist.
but i dont produce a piece thinking it will be famous.
ill produce a piece whenever i come across a thought that i cant relate in words to the person next to me.
but very close to 100%, i dont show anyone.
mainly because creativity is belittled in my environment.

basically i wont show my art unless i know someone wants to see it.
 
^^

May I ask why
creativity is belittled in my environment.
Click to expand...
What environment are you in that doesn't value creativity? And why remain there if that is the case?
 
i live in the second most conservative city in the us apparently

were more concerned about doing things right, than doing the right thing.

and anything thats not right... is most definitely, not right.
 
Dedbeet said:
Depends what ya want.

Everybody would love to view something from an outsider's perspective, but how are you actually going to do that?

You're not talking a challenge, you're talking impossible.

It's not a challenge to be able to stand outside of oneself and look back at oneself, it's an illusion.

You're really inside yourself looking out, silly.

Fer god's sake... once the "incoming-me-mind" really gets going, it believes its own stories and denies what it sees with its own eyes.

Not to mention, complains that it's confused.

Stopstopstop ;).

Peace...
Click to expand...


would acquiring an outsider's perspective necessitate being an outsider?

they say...in the not so distant future, the entire human brain will be mapped down to the single neuron level. mri scans of this future will most likely have the potential to track individual neural pathways and actually decipher "thought", theoretically.

next step: transfer of consciousness? lol
 
Urgez said:
would acquiring an outsider's perspective necessitate being an outsider?
Click to expand...
No... because it isn't possible to actually be an outsider.

But it necessitates being an insider (self)... that's what such attempts are actually in support of. You can't be an insider without being convinced that there are things outside, and feeling the separation. A periphery suggests a center, and vice versa.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top