/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>7198762
>>7198765
>"Man, i sure would like to invite these artists to work with me in a professional setting and even pay them to do that when they will just tweet and try to punch-up to farm clout. As a business person, I sure would very much like risking attracting negative attention to myself because i hired someone who can't control their emotions and use any opportunity to deploy underhanded and unprofessional tactics to gain social validation! Man, getting called a puritan bigot sure would get me to hire them and pay and work with them even more!"

>>6269778
>If your experience on something is not out of ordinary it most likely won't produce any extraordinary material.
That's where i disagree.
You could have no extraordinary experience, but still manage to create something interesting.
You don't need to have unique or out of the ordinary experiences to do that, you could just imagine or simulate those experiences, but most artist don't, because that requires stepping out of yourself and think, which people tend to avoid like cats avoid swimming.

I mean, are all the authors writing crimes and murders, criminal and murderers themselves?
Of course, they're not, but they gathered information, stepped out of themselves and used their brains.

Even then, something being interesting is subjective.
If someone wrote a whole book about whatever that would get the average whatever fan to cream their pants at the thought of it, it might be interesting to them, but not to someone who doesn't care about whatever, even if the whatever book could be objectively be the most detailed, informative, highly specific, insight inducing guide to whatever, it would still hold no value to a non-fan.
Beauty lies in the eyes of the beholder, after all.


But imo it's almost as shallow and generic as fotm anime titties floating in the void to claim that you need extraordinary experience to create something interesting.
>Motive alone doesn't produce meaningful or interesting art, it has to have substance and context to back it up.
But what drives one to create makes that difference.
If you were driven by wanting attention and social media clout, what do you think you will be driven to create?
If you were driven by genuine unadulterated passion, wouldn't you try to create something you'd know you'd be interested in as a consumer?

In the end, it's still the one viewing the creation evaluating its worth.

>>4864572
No.
She obviously hopped on the train once she saw that people were tweeting against the guy and in support of her and she tried to play the victim card.
Currently sitting at 10k and still putting her 2b picture everywhere.
Should have played it differently and maybe she could've gotten elon's followers to follow her.
>>4864589
>hurr durr but the sperg known as elon
Not the point, autismo.
The guy does things on purpose to get reactions and keep him in the newscycle.
The reactions he gets mostly proves the points he's trying to make.
It's not fucking rocket science.
Go back, pleb.