Lately I've been reading a lot around in blogland about calling oneself an artist or not.
Does it really matter?
Personally I prefer to be me, Laila, and that's enough. I don't claim to be an artist just as much as I don't claim the oposite either. I'm doing what I'm doing that's all.
The most important thing is that what I'm doing I'm doing it for me. If anyone else appreciate what I'm doing it's nice and can lead to even more inspiration but it's all about what's inside oneself. Isn't it?
If I'm really satisfied with something I've done, does another opinion ruin my satisfaction? Does another opinion confirm that I'm not an artist? I don't think so.
What are the boundaries for calling something art? Who can decide that this is art and that is not?
I'll never forget something that happened when my son was 4-5 years old. He often brought home stuff, from kindergarden, that he had made there. Very often I framed his drawings and hung them on a wall to show him appreciation for what he had done.
More than one person noticed one of his drawings and asked me which artist that had made it. Once I told them, the interest was gone. That told me that it isn't always the artwork itself but the person that counts.
At the bottomline it's the artwork that is important, not wether the person is called an artist. Don't you agree?
I'm well aware of the facts that many people won't agree to this and that's fine with me. I would like to hear your opinions though.
This issue inspired me to make this spread as a comment.
Wish you all the best and have a creative day.
No comments:
Post a Comment