in a furious anger i have not known before in my life...

[jordanmichael]

i can barely even breathe, let alone type a giant post about this. the head of the art department is the teacher of a class called "portfolio prep". it isn't a class. it is a grade based on you handing in 12 pieces of any type of art you want, and the sketches of what you do before you do that piece of art. planning it out. it is a required class for art majors, which i am. i was telling my art teacher how i can't sketch something before i work because i work when i have something to say. i am not going to force myself to have some false feeling and passion into a project. she went on to tell me how art doesn't need to be passionate, how you don't need to say anything, how, and i quote, "if it isn't technically good and follow the traditions of art it is worthless."

i must say, i don't think i'll be an art major for much longer.

[Antero]

Your teacher clearly isn't an artist.

[Greg Nog]

i work when i have something to say. i am not going to force myself to have some false feeling and passion into a project.

I hear where you're coming from, jordan, but the thing is, I think your teacher's perspective is a little useful here.  I doubt you're gonna create anything in that class that's personally relevant to you, but it's good to gain technical proficiency so that you have that tool to work with when you need it.  

Example:  I fucking hate drawing buildings.  Nothing about perspective or architecture is interesting to me in any way; I'd rather work on portraiture.  And don't even get me started on how bored I get by fucking still-lifes.  But unless I practice on drawings that don't mean anything to me, I won't know anything about drawing buildings or background objects, and then all my art's gonna look like Rob Liefeld's (I suppose the same goes for drawing feet).

she went on to tell me how art doesn't need to be passionate, how you don't need to say anything, how, and i quote, "if it isn't technically good and follow the traditions of art it is worthless."
i must say, i don't think i'll be an art major for much longer.

Okay, yeah, bitch is crazy.  But seriously, just suffer through this artistically-frigid nutcase's class, and you'll be a better artist for it.  She's wrong about works of pure passion always being worthless, but like I said, you gotta pick up boring technical proficiency at some point, or else all your art is gonna be roughly at the level of a twelve-year-old girl's goth livejournal.

[jordanmichael]

oh, and handing in cartoons is frowned on. no cartooning is allowed to be handed in that class. i am sorry, but that is fucked up. i hate all the fucking art majors that listen to the teachers like this. they have the most boring unmotivated art. yes, you can draw, but it sucks. it makes me feel nothing. it makes me see nothing. i know you can draw very well, but they make me feel dead. now, my friends mike and drew are amazing cartoonists. they do what any cartoonists knows how to do. they take the way they see things in their head and they make it into something everyone can see. and they are always drawing weird shit like this:

lots of ninjas and zombies, and mr. t on a boat holding fish. now, it isn't deep art, but it really does make me feel something. it has never failed in cheering me up, ever. that is art. something that makes you feel something. i hate to see them treated like lower class artists because they don't draw everything ultra realistic.

[jordanmichael]

i work when i have something to say. i am not going to force myself to have some false feeling and passion into a project.

I hear where you're coming from, jordan, but the thing is, I think your teacher's perspective is a little useful here.  I doubt you're gonna create anything in that class that's personally relevant to you, but it's good to gain technical proficiency so that you have that tool to work with when you need it.  

Example:  I fucking hate drawing buildings.  Nothing about perspective or architecture is interesting to me in any way; I'd rather work on portraiture.  And don't even get me started on how bored I get by fucking still-lifes.  But unless I practice on drawings that don't mean anything to me, I won't know anything about drawing buildings or background objects, and then all my art's gonna look like Rob Liefeld's (I suppose the same goes for drawing feet).

she went on to tell me how art doesn't need to be passionate, how you don't need to say anything, how, and i quote, "if it isn't technically good and follow the traditions of art it is worthless."
i must say, i don't think i'll be an art major for much longer.

Okay, yeah, bitch is crazy.  But seriously, just suffer through this artistically-frigid nutcase's class, and you'll be a better artist for it.  She's wrong about works of pure passion always being worthless, but like I said, you gotta pick up boring technical proficiency at some point, or else all your art is gonna be roughly at the level of a twelve-year-old girl's goth livejournal.

i am not really that serious of an "artist" in the visual sense. i've wanted to go to film school, and film isn't what the teacher teaches or specialized in. it wasn't even what we were talking about. what we were talking about was more my sculptures, which i do few and far between. i do them when i feel the need to. i have no technique at all. it is just sit down and let shit happen. like today i was in a really angry mood so i finaly made my religious sculpture, if you'd call it that. it involves all objects i have. i can't really find any of the technical side to it. i really don't want to to be honest.  i feel i have a really pure way of doing it. i just let how i feel completely take over what i'm doing. there has never been a time where i said "well i really don't know how to do or express this." then again, i said the same thing about my writing, and that was impossible to understand. i just don't like this woman telling me that letting your emotions take over your work and lead you is the wrong way to make art. i hate how this woman just sums up "art" in this neat little box and tells me what it needs to include, or else it's worthless.

[rockmeamadeus]

I'm totally with Greg here... your teacher obv. crazy and porbably a bitter ex-artist herself... but technical proficiency is a pretty NECCESSARY tool in any art form.
It's like this... to use an example from my own experience; when I was your age, I was utterly against taking any sort of music theory class. I thought it would distill my work, take all the feeling and the 'me' out of it, and become boring and uninteresting. Kurt Cobain didn't need music theory... Jack Kerouac didn't need creative writing courses... so neither did I. (Ahhh the heroes of my youth...)
Truth is though, you don't take music theory and your left to figure it all out on your own, and your bound to miss something. I still never took it, a fact which I regret now, because I have less outlets for my musical ideas.

Also, I was wrong as a kid about Kerouac. Dude had alot more method to his novels then I ever realized back then. Damnit I love Jack Kerouac. But I digress...

Learning the boring techniques behind an art form only gives you tools to bring OUT your ideas. This is kinda like your writing problem a little earlier... where you couldn't just sit down and write? You had to be 'inspired'? And we encouraged you to just WRITE, even though it sucked, because it would train you to channel your ideas when they DID come? Think of this class like that. I'm sure you'll be able to take some positive things out of it.
For serious.

[rockmeamadeus]

i just don't like this woman telling me that letting your emotions take over your work and lead you is the wrong way to make art. i hate how this woman just sums up "art" in this neat little box and tells me what it needs to include, or else it's worthless.

Also, you gotta know what the sqaure's definition of 'art' is if your ever going to work outsidie of it. This is hardly true in every case, but I think it's a useful veiwpoint.

[jordanmichael]

I'm totally with Greg here... your teacher obv. crazy and porbably a bitter ex-artist herself... but technical proficiency is a pretty NECCESSARY tool in any art form.
It's like this... to use an example from my own experience; when I was your age, I was utterly against taking any sort of music theory class. I thought it would distill my work, take all the feeling and the 'me' out of it, and become boring and uninteresting. Kurt Cobain didn't need music theory... Jack Kerouac didn't need creative writing courses... so neither did I. (Ahhh the heroes of my youth...)
Truth is though, you don't take music theory and your left to figure it all out on your own, and your bound to miss something. I still never took it, a fact which I regret now, because I have less outlets for my musical ideas.

Also, I was wrong as a kid about Kerouac. Dude had alot more method to his novels then I ever realized back then. Damnit I love Jack Kerouac. But I digress...

Learning the boring techniques behind an art form only gives you tools to bring OUT your ideas. This is kinda like your writing problem a little earlier... where you couldn't just sit down and write? You had to be 'inspired'? And we encouraged you to just WRITE, even though it sucked, because it would train you to channel your ideas when they DID come? Think of this class like that. I'm sure you'll be able to take some positive things out of it.
For serious.

you have a good point. i know i am overreacting and i will regret acting like this tomorrow, but it is so frustrating how she thinks that techniques can replace passion and love. you can have all the techniques in the world, but if you don't love what you're doing it'll still suck. another reason i overreacted was how it lined right up with what i am so frustrated about. i feel i can't connect with almost everyone in my school just because they are all lacking passion about everything. they are very "i like stuff" about EVERYTHING. i am kinda opposite. i know love what i love and i hate what i hate. the whole situation is just frustrating. so to have a teacher saying "oh well passion isn't needed" just made me flip. passion isn't needed? fuck you, lady. by the way, my school sucks at teaching technique and theory. we have all these classes for it, but you don't learn anything. no substance. if you know any theory behind burning the new testament, ripping it out of it's spin, nailing it back together, and then glueing quarters to it, please let me know.

[Good Intentions]

If he goes on too much about the traditions of art, then it's time to rip out dada. God damn I love dada. If you ever see some guy make a piece of 'concept art', jordan, you know that he will forever be your bitch. Concept art is anti-art, and every guy who seriously bottles breath or uses readymades is destroying the foundations of his little world, and that little world has to accept it. I adore dada.

That said, you need to be able to draw. Need. And you'll never understand how badly you need it until you have sat down and spent those long hours drawing bicycles or keyrings or (in my case) clothes brushes. Fuck, like me you might eventually enjoy it - if not the drawing itself the knowledge of technical proficiency. Every artist you have ever heard of is a great drawer. Even Miro was a great drawer. Jackson Pollock? Fantastic draughtsman. Etc. etc.

In a very real way it is how you purchase your entry into the art world - any part of the art world. Up till that point you are a charlatan.
Doesn't change the fact that your art teacher sounds like a dick.

[philosophergenius2000]

john lennons drawings sucked

[philosophergenius2000]

oh and so does any "dada" made after WWII

[mackro]

Does she look like this?

[Yes_Train]

If you actually have to hand in your sketches long before you do a piece, just plan your art ahead of time and do it the way she wants you to even though it's not going to be meaningful to you.

I mean, you might as well try to get good grades in this class so that you can get into a good art school, where I really doubt you'd come across teachers who subscribe to that school of thought.

My school's portfolio class definitely doesn't request sketches or plans. It's good stuff.

[Good Intentions]

oh and so does any "dada" made after WWII

Just what is it that makes today's homes so different, so appealing?
Richard Hamilton

Get with the program, grumpy

[lucky strike]

i had that class in high school. my art teacher was the opposite, though. young, annoying artfag. she was cool, despite the fact that she was obsessed with being accepted by a bunch of douchebags into the art scene.

[Keith from TTIKTDA]

oh and so does any "dada" made after WWII

Even the Sex Pistols?

[Greg Nog]

Or Trio?

[Good Intentions]

oh and so does any "dada" made after WWII

Even the Sex Pistols?

I think our dismissive friend is on an overstated ironic crusade. Perhaps he chose a fitting thread for it.

[lineduster]

I think our dismissive friend is on an overstated ironic crusade.

Good Intentions: 1
Marcel Duchamp and co. : 0

[philosophergenius2000]

Just What is it that makes todays home so different, so appealing?

not dada and yes every thing you mention that is considered dada i will say That Sucks and it dont got shit to do with being ironic
but drawing still like if fucking lame except when lucky strike does it
im cool with that but dont ask me to draw nuttin arts for dummies (still no irony REAL OPINIONS)

[philosophergenius2000]

hee hee
drawing still like
DADA DOESNT SUCK AFTER ALL
IM A CHANGE-ED MAN

[Andrew_TSKS]

oh and so does any "dada" made after WWII

Even the Sex Pistols?

i'd call them more post-situationist. ever read "lipstick traces" or even "england's dreaming"?

[WhereTheSlimeLive]

wait, I thought you were in highshcool?

[coldforge]

Apparently his high school has majors. I wonder if his manservant uses Mylar-coated tongs when he turns the pages of his comic books for him, or just regulars.

[Keith from TTIKTDA]

oh and so does any "dada" made after WWII

Even the Sex Pistols?

i'd call them more post-situationist. ever read "lipstick traces" or even "england's dreaming"?

I was in fact making a crude, lazy, reference to Lipstick Traces in hopes of provoking a response.

So yea, I've read it.

And situationism & Dada are pretty closely linked.