>>15462346>You're taking arbitrary qualities and declaring them as artistic because you decided that they areHow ironic.
You showed your whole ass when you claimed to be a professional art for 14 years (very vague) and talked about working with professionals, who I assume are more successful than you are, and chided them as being "far removed from any real artistry".
You're not an artist for art itself, because you're consumed with policing what it means while being just as vague and arbitrary as you claim me to be.
And you're not an artist for finance or success, considering you're here, on a wrestling board, talking in circles to try and fit all art into your bitter, spitefully narrow view.
>>15462375>Why do you need to call a member of an orchestra an artist?You blatantly ignore the difference I established between art itself and artists, which anybody can grasp if they're not up their own ass the way you are. I explicitly explored how the creation of a product, of an artistic output, doesn't mean the moving parts behind that creation are all artists. If you're a cashier who can paint, you might not be an "artist", but your paintings are certainly an artistic expression.
You ignore all of this just so you can play smug and pretentious because you're either a LARPer, or, at the very best, a middling industry worker with no real accomplishment or success, but a whole lot of nothing to say and a lot of tears to shed.
You want art to be so exclusive and specific because you worked so hard to get here and got NOTHING out of it.
You're entitled to it.
You're the one that deserves it.
So when you're met with people who create more or make more money to create, regardless of what it is, it pisses you the fuck off.
You don't come off as someone who cares about art.
You come off as someone who cares about the time he spent on it.
>>15462439Don't reply to yourself pretending to be someone else. That's bad manners.
