/ic/ - Artwork/Critique

>>4829343
The sad truth about talking online is that it's mostly meaningless. Unless you have some authority and some way of spreading the information, it will often fall on sad ears.
The biggest benefit of online discussion besides human interaction is writing practice.
Writing in a discussion setting helps you improve articulation. Writing in a discussion settings help you figure out how you like conversing. You have a chance to get positive or negative emotional feedback for if you enjoy how you write and behave.
I almost exclusively write a response if it's something that want to try and put into words, or if it's to thank someone for their kindness.
"What is the most root basis of art explained scientifically" and "why do we talk online" are two subjects that I pounder a lot. Trying to articulate them into proper language is a wise use of time. On the other hand repeating over and over the same thing, hoping one day it will help someone, isn't very productive, nor does it feel very good to me.
Articulation is important. It tests for any gaps in your logic.
Not dissimilar to drawing we often have incomplete thoughts, and don't notice everything about them until we lay them on paper and figure out the missing pieces.
The difference between talking online and trying to talk as well as you can is the difference between slouching and walking in proper form with weights. You learn and grow.

"Life is study" -Kintao Oe

>>4826474
I was very pleasantly surprised.
They changed the name to focus on manga in general, not just the award.
I believe these will keep going.

>>4534041
This is a thought experiment denouncing the merit of pollock, showing that people argue about the name with nothing to the art itself.
The object in the picture is a dirty apron, not a pollock painting
The fact nobody in the thread even noticed it including the people arguing that this is masterful is a testament to the experiment being right
Splattered paint looks inherently cool and chaotic. It's something that looks good without the artist even being in the equation.
Opening a tap in the middle of a museum would not be any different. no man has claim to the beauty of fluid dynamics.

>clever marketing
"Making it" is about making money, fame, or a living off of doing what you love. If his passion was art than he's not making money or being known for his artistic merit. If his passion was splashing paint around good for him, but that wouldn't be drawing or making art.
Regardless of whether this was marketing genius or a product of its time, his works hasn't pushed the merit of art in any way. It doesn't matter how sensational he is for an artist there is no reason to study him. If you want some splatters to compliment your work, you may as well ask your dirty apron instead