Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Microcap & Penny Stocks : Amazon Natural (AZNT) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Janice Shell who wrote (22964)	5/26/1999 6:27:00 PM
From: Cindy Powell	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 26163

Whew Janice... you were sure spitting nails in that post! You are "frankly sick and tired...?" Geez Janice, you need a rest and a refresher course on creativity. PCM's post was thoughtful and insightful, and not only did I like what he had to say, I also agree with what he had to say. Maybe everyone isn't an artist to you Janice, because you are so caught up in perfectionism. Artistic expression is "intended" to move both the artist and the art appreciator, and how and why something moves someone is very personal and subjective. There were few who thought much of Vincent Van Gogh's "efforts" at expressing his inspirations on his canvas... now look at how much people are paying for his originals. I loved how he painted the potato people with their feet "one" with the soil, because he was moved by their interdependancy and one-ness. I'm sure not everyone can relate to Vincent Van Gogh... but as they say, different strokes for different folks. I love Van Gogh's stuff, but as you know, being an art historian, his 'ol melancholy mama didn't think much of his artwork and threw alot of his early work away. Maybe she was "frankly sick and tired" of Vincent "trying" to think he was good at something, eh?

To: Janice Shell who wrote (22964)	5/27/1999 12:05:00 AM
From: PCModem	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 26163

"Easy for you to say. But as far as the "art" that'll end up in museums 100 years from now, 1000 years from now, well, I beg to differ." Not sure I know what you are begging to differ with, since I did not say anything like that. My comment is about artists, yours about art. Two different subjects, if you ask me. I don't know anything about Pugs or his "stuff" so can't comment on that. I'll take your word for it. "Is "everyone" a potential NBA basketball player? Um, no." I agree, but that does not mean we should take down all the basketball courts, do a recall on all the basketballs, and not allow kids shooting hoops, high school varsity team players, college kids with basketball scholarships and the like to think of themselves as basketball players. NBA? No, but basketball players? Certainly. "Frankly I'm sick and tired of people who think that if they "try" to be good at something, that means that they are. And that we should applaud 'em for their effort. Wrong." I sympathize with you about these "people" you refer to, and the things they are trying to convince you of. However, what I said was that everyone is an artist. I did not say everyone's art was good or valuable or destined to be recognized at some future date when tastes twist around to embrace them. As you know, better than most I should think, the history of art has many many examples of artists whose works became valued after their death, and few whose work was properly appreciated while they lived. Which suggests to me that overall those least equipped to correctly judge art are those in the first audience for which it is created (the same principle applies to movie critics, IMHO). Everyone is an artist. If it were not so, how could we have any appreciation for art? PCM