Quote:
Originally Posted by sanking  Thanks for the generous comment.
I have discussed this issue with a number of artists, and most agree that the fun for them is in the process itsel in applying the creative juices to achieve a certain end. But once that end is achieved it becomes an object, and in some cases a product. Its interest at that point shifts to another reality, sometimes commercial.
Sandy King |
I guess in my post I wasn't clear (even in my own mind) WHOSE assumption it seemed to be. It certainly is not mine; I definitely agree with you and the artists with whom you've consulted. My artist colleagues would agree, also, I'm pretty sure.
Since my own background is very diffuse, the assumptions that I've seen as bases for work haven't just been artists. I've worked in commercial studios, where the work is definitely generated by clients needs and process is meaningless except as it serves those needs as quickly as possible for the least amount of money. There's little joy in that. That's at one end. In between would be the millions of commercial portrait and amateur images I've shepherded personally or observed going through color labs. Again, what's so exciting? The process never varies and the imagery hardly does either. With my own editorial work, everything served the story, whether it was assigned from the office or generated through my own research; process was always an element here and often quite significant, but driven by the desired end. I did love that work, generally. In my fine art work, which hasn't always been clearly separated from the editorial and SOME of the commercial work done for my own clients, process was at least a large part, and generally dominant - pretty much entirely in the fine art end.
So, I apologize for the confusion, if there has been some. Sometimes my writing skips across something that is important in ways I haven't thought about.
Linear Mode
