4 ms·
This comment seems to me to be incredibly condescending and implies that a professional artist (whatever that definition is) cannot have fun making new discover
by cjslep 8y ago
This comment seems to me to be incredibly condescending and implies that a professional artist (whatever that definition is) cannot have fun making new discoveries for themselves in the world of art.
I am sorry that you are only interested in the professional artists on psychedelics; I think looking at its effect on all artists novice or otherwise is interesting.
- yesenadam 8y agoWell, this comment seems incredibly condescending to me. You're not 'sorry', and I can't see the implication you suggest at all. Please allow people to freely be interested in what they're interested in.
- cjslep 8y agoI am fine with people being interested in whatever pleases them, so long as they aren't being mean to others about it. Granted, a sibling comment to yours made me see how the person I responded to could formulate a reasonable argument. Whereas previously I could only see bourgeois academic snobbery. So, like you, I thought there was only one way to interpret it. But now, I have been enlightened. I am indeed sorry.
- c22 8y agoYours is not a very charitable reading. I think gp is just pointing out that a lot of people "give up" on art at a young age, so a regression to childish tendencies when it comes to art and psychedelics may not imply such a regression generally. It would be interesting if the subject was a professional artist with many years of training and technique, because then to throw this all away to "do art as a three year old might" is much more indicative of the claim that psychedelics induce child-like behavior, which is the main point of discussion in this thread.
- cjslep 8y agoYes I suppose it wasn't. I am sorry. I can see now this argument, which seems reasonable. I had mistakenly read the previous message as complete belittlement.