I’m an artist and I feel great. As a singer-songwriter I’ve already come to terms with Swedish mega-producers, drum machines, Live Nation, and whatever drives people to consume corporate music.
What exactly makes things any harder for artists than it has ever been? Was there some glorious moment in the past when people didn’t look down at the average poets for being lazy and useless?
Sure, laud the best of the best, but you know for a fact that you’ve thought it a bad decision for someone you know who isn’t gifted with genius level talent to pursue a career in the arts.
It has never been easy.
Frankly, if AI makes a pop song or if Lana Del Ray’s producers make a pop song, it really is no different to me. No one is going to replace the folk singer because the audience is already selecting for the poet, not the product. Who cares what frat bros are chugging beer to?
Is part of the response to this ad the subconscious realization that one doesn’t make or actively appreciate organic art to begin with?
When was the last time most of us went to an open mic? Or bought a painting from a local artist?
Many tools can be used for art, even the featureless grey rectangle. Your attitude feels a lot like gatekeeping to me similar to when cameras replaced paintings, then digital replaced film, then phones replaced big bodies, etc…
For whatever reason I feel compelled to share my initial reaction to this comment:
Just because you managed to use "tool of art" as a literal phrase doesn't make your point more clear. Why should I care if a couple of these pieces are destroyed. Presumably they didn't destroy anything of historical, cultural, personal, or scarce significance. Are you sure you're not making an argument based only in emotions?
You do not have to. To me the feeling was kind of visceral. I usually do not have habit of analyzing my feelings. But ok, I'll try. It feels like an ugly imbecile walking into art museum, crushing everything around and saying: what a useless piece of shit, here, use this brick instead.
