🇨🇦TheArtGun🇨🇦

YouTube video by Rare Americans Rare Americans - Love Is All I Bring (Official Video)

The idea of a big earthquake on the coast inspired one of my favorite songs by one of my favorite bands
They have a lot of bangers imo and tackle a lot of life experiences and topics

youtu.be/7U4DpAvuZio?...

Good news about the cascadia fault recently if you’re living on the west coast you should look it up.
Still concern but sounds like less than before and because of what’s going on with the plates, they can better explain why the historic routine broke i think? If i understood right

I’ll peak when I’m dead

Okay, it’s very oppressive and it’s also what fascists do to art when they are in power.

Absolutely and I love to see it

I just hate to see sneering elitist dismissive pricks especially in respected positions punching down

Like film makers who treat animation like it can’t be real art

Lol and you remove the embed so people can’t look at the thread easily, what are you scared of?
If you were confident you were right, you shouldn’t mind having people see our discussion.

Controlling what people see to control the narrative seems very… oh darn it. I just can’t think of the word!

Move forward.
Expecting perfection because somebody else explained themselves better somewhere else is the death of self expression.

The meanings of words constantly shift, words only mean what we think they mean, so arguing about literal definition distracts from actual intent.

Have said anything. I’m telling you what I think, if my initial words were not enough for you to understand, then further explanation can fill those gaps and we can both learn and move forward from it ideally.
Accepting that things will be imperfect and being open to discussion is the only way to

Deleted my replies because you made multiple threads and my question was answered elsewhere
The wonderful thing about communication is that while imperfect, we can go back and forth and explain ourselves better
I may have used what you think is the wrong word, but that doesn’t mean I shouldn’t

Is bad. It’s a conservative idea, right wing, authoritarian, fascist aligned.

Creating is a human right and telling people they can’t be considered creators until they study enough of the right things is wrong.

Itself more than simply oppressive, it has an agenda.

For example, I wouldn’t be complaining if the sentiment being shared was simply “reading more will help writers learn to write better” or some variant of that idea.

My issue is specifically the gatekeeping, and how gatekeeping in art generally

Fascists historically have used art and prescribing which art and ideas have value and which don’t for their personal bias/goals in culture.

I am comparing the system of valuing art/artists to that of a fascist because wanting to control or define who can make art or be considered an artist is by

I don’t think oppressive fits the nuance of what I meant.

You’re ignoring the entire half of the issue that I take issue with to be dismissive. I’ve already said I have no issue with encourage people to read.

My issue is in saying people can’t create unless they consume.

Telling people that they can’t is both demonstrably incorrect and wrong.

Technical skill is easy to grade on complexity and execution, artistic value is a lot more nuanced and comparison is somewhat useless.

Whatever they say about comparison being the death of joy

Building off that point- if somebody in Picasso’s most influential time or shortly after decided to make cave paintings, does the existence of Picasso and their lack of study of Picasso make their work worth less? Technical skill is different than artistic value.

Thank you for understanding and saying it so concisely, you’re awesome

I sprayed the cat piss, I still smell cat piss, I don't know from where it comes but I hope to find it soon or I shall perish

technically definitionally tied to government.
I apologize for my limited vocabulary in this case, as I'm not aware of a perfect word to define what I mean, which is why I wrote a thread and am answering this comment to further to describe what I meant specifically.

Fascism's use as a word expands beyond it's literal definition of a specific power structure- to the ideology behind that power structure
Namely, dividing things into "good" and "bad" based on personal biases.
That's what I was getting at. Authoritarian might have been better, but that's also

Art is also directly tied to culture and politics, so acting like the comparison is definitionally disconnected is silly.

It's not telling people to read, it's telling people that if they don't read they *can't* be writers, specifically, which is, actually, gatekeeping.
Did you read the whole thread?
The cultural gatekeeping of who gets to be considered a writer/artist is fascist.
Reading is good, absolutely

Reading is good for the brain, it's connected. I'm also not saying people shouldn't read, I'm saying it's wrong to gatekeep who can be considered an artist, and comparing gatekeeping art to fascism (because they love to gatekeep art and what art is correct/valid or not)

It's objectively correct that the amount somebody has read isn't 100% connected to their study and understanding
Simply reading more doesn't automatically mean that person understands more than somebody who has read less
It's related, just not 1:1 enough to gatekeep greatness or rate ability by.

EXACTLY

This is why elitism and gatekeeping is a problem and art isn't objectiiiive it's communication ;-; I am begging and pleading I am on my knees

I am sorry for the long answer I am passionate

The discourse seems to be driven by high level communicators looking down on people who are happy on the "low level" communication and not wanting to be compared. Of course who gets to be a 'high level' communicator is political, so discussion about ableism and validity of art is... valid

on it's own, which I think it is, there are going to always be multiple levels of that communication. A scientific paper isn't going to be understood by non-scientists.
A high level novel isn't going to be understood by people who can't read at that level or have the requisite contextual knowlege

The creator at 5 minutes says it's self centered to believe you're uniquely able to write having not read-
And he has a point
But the entire argument he makes in the video is centered around the goal and value on the medium and craft, which is (arguably) separate from the art.
If art is a language

been done before, you shouldn't do it because it's trite and doesn't contribute to... some overall idea of art I guess.

At 4 minutes,
The guy making the video is outright dismissive off the bat of the idea of ableism in creativity

The crux of the issue is about what art is valid