Scopophiliac

Art comments from a Gen-Xer

Ahhhh... sure.. ok. Art and altruism in the same person but separate endeavors.. Yes.

Cynicism vs. realism...A romantic view of art and art-making produces nice stories to tell yourself in order to justify a self-absorbed practice, however, i prefer to be honest with myself about my reasons. I make art for myself and myself alone. If someone gets something from looking at my work it is not because I have them in mind.

Sure... art serves a purpose But, for most artists this fact merely a provides a way to avoid being labeled "self-absorbed". Which, honestly, we all are. We're not curing cancer or volunteering at homeless shelters, we're hiding in our studios contemplating our navel in order to be recognized as culturally relevant and more specifically important humans. But to believe that art-making is, on any level, an altruistic activity is delusional. If a viewer benefits from an artists work it is despite the artists intention....

The idea of sacrificing one's self for one's art is part of the mythology that the ill-informed tend to latch onto. If someone such as Van Gogh dies "in the line of fire" (while making art)... everyone is quick to say "... he sacrificed himself so that we might behold his legacy." (to be read with a haughty faux brit. accent) But if some poor sap ODs while making trite, hackish, bullshit, art is it still a self-sacrice with all of it's nobility? Self-sacrifice is in the eye of the deluded beholder.