4 ms·

What do robots have to do with outsider artists?

techbio 8y ago
Finding money to support the disenfranchised. Edit: My original answer was unclear and too brief for someone. A clearer answer is that outsider artists, as generally identified by profound social marginalization, typically resulting from mental illnesses, are statistically almost never able to support themselves on art-making. Programs exist for the mentally ill, yet it would be a hard case to make that these are sufficient for creating quality of life such that everyone suffering in that category, and who would rather be making art as a primary occupation, can support themselves and live independently (provided that is a goal) on art making income. But like many causes, money for this cause is harder to come by than it could be in the wealthiest nation in the world. Extracting money, not currently available, from the least creative of workers to support creative work and fulfilling lives for "outsider artists" and all others on the margins of the modern economy seems to me a kind of fair play.
- s-shellfish 8y ago
  This is a bad thing for art?
  - techbio 8y ago
    This is not achieved by the rare "outsider art" sale. I'm not sure why you have a problem with my original post, or if you even read it.
    - s-shellfish 8y ago
      I can't understand most of it, to be honest. My perspective is art can sometimes take centuries to make sense from the creator to the person that it's right for, so it doesn't make sense to expect a functioning, mechanized economy to provide for it. That's the point of art. To tell an idea to someone who needs it. If you tax it and expect it to work like everything else does, it can't do that.
      - ModernMech 8y ago
        > That's the point of art. To tell an idea to someone who needs it. Maybe for some people, but art for me has always been about expressing myself. I've never created anything for someone else's enjoyment. If someone happens to enjoy it, okay then, but it's my feelings on the canvas, not my interpretation of what you need to see on the canvas.
        s-shellfish 8y ago
        I understand that sentiment. I also understand the other.
      - techbio 8y ago
        Your trouble understanding may be that my phrase in the original post "a stipend for materials" really isn't saying what I meant to say, which in fact is simply "a stipend." But it's too late for me to edit now.
        s-shellfish 8y ago
        My trouble stems from your judgement of art you don't seem actively involved in creating, therefore, art you don't understand. I assume you aren't involved in creating it because you are very negative about it. That said, if you want to create it, being able to find resources to create it can continuously be a challenging problem, and this is especially difficult if that's what your survival depends on.
- deleted 8y ago
  [deleted]
techbio 8y ago
Very few people who would be artists make any money at it. I am one of them. You have gotten me almost entirely wrong. I'm sure for your own reasons, but it's gotten insulting. Edit: Removed "RTFA"
- s-shellfish 8y ago
  Yes, I project my own issues frequently because I've explained my art to psychologists, counselors and therapists to the point that I realised all my art was doing was trying to explain my feelings to people around me about my mental illness everyone else thought I had with them lacking the awareness of realizing how their active involvement in all of that affected me mentally. I just assumed they understood and still cared about me, which they do. Now (just kidding, I have always done this) I take my dumb dumb issues out on the internet at strangers based on the salience of their perspectives which seems to be diametrically opposite to the conclusions I've come to, clearly this is a selection bias in information and I'm making too many assumptions about you. The last piece of art I made was a picture of a body that was supposed to be me understanding myself. Clearly this has been challenging for me as I find myself completely unable to create new art, besides code, which requires me to think clearly and logically and simply about everything. Not to mention the consequences of how understanding myself may affect others. Having empathy for the feelings of those around you is really hard when you have to think about yourself first. Obviously I am terrible at doing this on the internet because I don't know who I'm talking to. We all project our issues through our personal experiences and beliefs we hold onto. Sometimes that changes my mind, sometimes it changes yours. Art, everything, yay, the world is still boring because I am a boring person with no magic or mystery in my life, sparse connections that bind me to individuals through concrete understandings. I don't need to RTFA. There don't have to be rules on the internet. If I need to RTFA you need to read everything that came before the article that created the article. But you don't, because you are replying to the article, and the author may be here, but you wouldn't be aware of that, so you operate on the assumption that you don't have to read everything that led up to the article, just the article itself, perpetuating dogmatic ideologies that secure your world view. That's insulting to me, so sorry! I have opinions on stuff sometimes! Some people have talent and aren't as lucky as you. Don't squash them like bugs just because its disruptive. Maybe you need therapy. Wyatt Cenac has a good piece on culture clash.

Finding money to support the disenfranchised. Edit: My original answer was unclear and too brief for someone. A clearer answer is that outsider artists, as generally identified by profound social marginalization, typically resulting from mental illnesses, are statistically almost never able to support themselves on art-making. Programs exist for the mentally ill, yet it would be a hard case to make that these are sufficient for creating quality of life such that everyone suffering in that category, and who would rather be making art as a primary occupation, can support themselves and live independently (provided that is a goal) on art making income. But like many causes, money for this cause is harder to come by than it could be in the wealthiest nation in the world. Extracting money, not currently available, from the least creative of workers to support creative work and fulfilling lives for "outsider artists" and all others on the margins of the modern economy seems to me a kind of fair play.

s-shellfish 8y ago
This is a bad thing for art?
- techbio 8y ago
  This is not achieved by the rare "outsider art" sale. I'm not sure why you have a problem with my original post, or if you even read it.
  - s-shellfish 8y ago
    I can't understand most of it, to be honest. My perspective is art can sometimes take centuries to make sense from the creator to the person that it's right for, so it doesn't make sense to expect a functioning, mechanized economy to provide for it. That's the point of art. To tell an idea to someone who needs it. If you tax it and expect it to work like everything else does, it can't do that.
    - ModernMech 8y ago
      > That's the point of art. To tell an idea to someone who needs it. Maybe for some people, but art for me has always been about expressing myself. I've never created anything for someone else's enjoyment. If someone happens to enjoy it, okay then, but it's my feelings on the canvas, not my interpretation of what you need to see on the canvas.
      - s-shellfish 8y ago
        I understand that sentiment. I also understand the other.
    - techbio 8y ago
      Your trouble understanding may be that my phrase in the original post "a stipend for materials" really isn't saying what I meant to say, which in fact is simply "a stipend." But it's too late for me to edit now.
      - s-shellfish 8y ago
        My trouble stems from your judgement of art you don't seem actively involved in creating, therefore, art you don't understand. I assume you aren't involved in creating it because you are very negative about it. That said, if you want to create it, being able to find resources to create it can continuously be a challenging problem, and this is especially difficult if that's what your survival depends on.
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]

techbio 8y ago

Very few people who would be artists make any money at it. I am one of them. You have gotten me almost entirely wrong. I'm sure for your own reasons, but it's gotten insulting. Edit: Removed "RTFA"

s-shellfish 8y ago
Yes, I project my own issues frequently because I've explained my art to psychologists, counselors and therapists to the point that I realised all my art was doing was trying to explain my feelings to people around me about my mental illness everyone else thought I had with them lacking the awareness of realizing how their active involvement in all of that affected me mentally. I just assumed they understood and still cared about me, which they do. Now (just kidding, I have always done this) I take my dumb dumb issues out on the internet at strangers based on the salience of their perspectives which seems to be diametrically opposite to the conclusions I've come to, clearly this is a selection bias in information and I'm making too many assumptions about you. The last piece of art I made was a picture of a body that was supposed to be me understanding myself. Clearly this has been challenging for me as I find myself completely unable to create new art, besides code, which requires me to think clearly and logically and simply about everything. Not to mention the consequences of how understanding myself may affect others. Having empathy for the feelings of those around you is really hard when you have to think about yourself first. Obviously I am terrible at doing this on the internet because I don't know who I'm talking to. We all project our issues through our personal experiences and beliefs we hold onto. Sometimes that changes my mind, sometimes it changes yours. Art, everything, yay, the world is still boring because I am a boring person with no magic or mystery in my life, sparse connections that bind me to individuals through concrete understandings. I don't need to RTFA. There don't have to be rules on the internet. If I need to RTFA you need to read everything that came before the article that created the article. But you don't, because you are replying to the article, and the author may be here, but you wouldn't be aware of that, so you operate on the assumption that you don't have to read everything that led up to the article, just the article itself, perpetuating dogmatic ideologies that secure your world view. That's insulting to me, so sorry! I have opinions on stuff sometimes! Some people have talent and aren't as lucky as you. Don't squash them like bugs just because its disruptive. Maybe you need therapy. Wyatt Cenac has a good piece on culture clash.