Thursday, April 19, 2012
Revolutionary Era Discussion Question 2
Political change in the Revolutionary Era affected economic stability in many parts of the world. As artists, how did the changing tide of economic certainty affect your ability to be creative? Is it necessary to have secure economic resources to be an artist? Explain.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
The changing tide of economic cetaintu did not affect my ability to be creative. It actually lead me to be even more creative. If something is going on around you it can cause a certain emotion that you can express through your beloved art. As mine is music.
ReplyDeleteIt is cerainly not necessary to have secure economic resources, although some may beg to differ. I had been born into a poor family. My first actual music lessons came from a BLIND organist. And yes, without him...I would be nothing. If you really have a passion in what you do, Then make it happen. Sure it would be simple to be rich and have everything thrown at you.Everything right in front of you, yet you'd be so blind.What joy can you find in something that you do, but have not worked for. It is a great feeling to start off with nothing, and end with something that you have worked really hard for and love so passionatly! Yet no matter what, you should do what you love. And think:
Are we artists not to blame for such beauty? Such Empowerment over people through our arts?
I agree with Mr.Mehul. Money did not effect my ability to be creative. As a child I had also grown up in a poor family. And when my father passed away money got even tighter for my family, thats why becoming a composer has effected my life so much. I believe the money I have now is just enough for my family and I to get by. True creativity does not come from the depths of someones wallet but from the passion one has for their art.
ReplyDeleteI dont think money really effects anyones ability to be creative. Although my family didnt struggle for anything, we wern't the richest people in the world. Although we were pretty well off. I agree with Mr.Mehul as well as with Mr. Billings. You dont have to be very rich to do great.
ReplyDeleteBut I believe you have to have some kind of resources to do very extra well. The fact that my parents were actors helped me alot. Their knowledge, their money, and their connections helped me become the great actress I am now. And yes Mr. Billings, I believe that it takes true talent to be great. Which must mean I have true talent.
The fact of the matter is truly simple indeed. People that were raised on money will lead to pursuade ones mind that you have to have money to do well. For people that did not have very many resources they still succeeded in pursueing their dreams becoming artists. But dosen't this truly answer Madame Andreadis' question? Obviously you do not need a great deal of riches to lead a prosperous life in the arts because artisits like Moi and M. Billings did, along with many others!
ReplyDeleteWell let me first say that this seems to be a very calm converstaion with no conflict what so ever! Its a bit boring don't you think? That being said I do agree with all of you economic recorces are not needed to be a sucessful artist. I was discovered as an actress and a singer while working as a servent in order to help support my family after my father spent my mother's fortune. I think that being poor almost helped my acting in a way because I was not sheltered as a rich child and had some real life experiences.
ReplyDeleteHow would you agree on an ever so hasty comment, such as the one Kitty Clive had the audacity to provoke? Because this ever so inteligent conversation doesn't invole any conflict... it's boring? What... we are all at a nice diner party speaking to eachother for the first time and we all have to "yell" and "scream" our opinions at everyone? I dispise conflict! Every bit. Sorry that my opion had to drive ourselves off of this topic, i just thought I would correct Ms. Clive and her ignorant concept on conflict.
ReplyDeleteWell Mr. Mehul and my dear Kitty, I believe everyone here is entitled to their own opinion. Therefor I do believe it is time I share mine. I was not dreadfully poor, but then again I was not filthy rich. I was discovered singing at a fair in a small town, and then I became an actress at the Drury Lane Theatre. My husband and I worked for living by doing what we loved, and that is how we supported our family. I think making a living, doing what gave me joy in life makes me very blessed indeed. But back to the topic, I don't believe money makes anyone a better artist, but nor do I think being rich makes you any less talented. I believe being rich just means you have better opportunities presented to yout to spread your individual talent. And people who are poor have just as much creative talent, they just might have to work harder to have themselves be known.
ReplyDeleteOui, I agree with you Madame Pritcherd. If you have the talent and the devotion, then you can achieve what you want to pursue in life! I say, I know a very poor, blind, organist and he became wht he wanted to be.
ReplyDeleteI may add that in order to be an artists not only do you need talent but also passion. And lets not forget lots of hard hard work!
DeleteThat is very admirable that a blind man was able to make such a fantastic career for himself, and I daresay that makes you quite blessed as well to have been able to learn from such an inspirational man indeed. Do you believe that your blind organist mentor would have been as successful if he hadn't been blind? My point for that question being, if he hadn't had to overcome such an obstacle, do you think he would have developed such tremendous artistic talent?
ReplyDeleteI do very musch agree with you Madame Pritcherd! I was very blessed to have worked with this incredible man. And to answer your question i say, yes. Of course he would of been succesful if he was not blind. But if he wouldn't of been blind, I dont think he would have as much devotion and passion as he does now. If I may elaborate further madame, what I am trying to say is that my mentor did indeed work very hard to be where is is know artisticly. If he wouldn't of had to work as hard, Oui he would still have a great talent at the organ, but he wouldn't have that strong music passion that he has now!
DeleteThat is quite inspiring indeed, especially coming from one great artist to another. It makes me think of an actor without his or her voice, they would have to use their faces to convey the same amount of emotion. Perhaps the greatest actors or actresses of all would be the ones without their voices because their faces would bring out so much emotion. Quite an interesting thought indeed Mr. Mehul!
DeleteAs the same for you Madame Pritchard!
DeleteWell Mr. Mehul it seems you have taken my light jesting the wrong way it was not meant to start anything and I do not think that we must yell our opinions out at each other and if you are so incompetent to take my comment that way then you will I was merely pointing out a fact and i honestly admire you all because of it. In response to you my dearest Hannah i take a different tone, I think it would have made the organist much less tankful for his incredible talents.
ReplyDeleteDo you think your obstacles in life have made you a better actress Kitty dear? I know you came from an Irish family with not the most helpful financial situation and you had to work very hard to be where you were when you and I began working together. Do you think you would have had as much drive to succeed had you not had to work for it?
DeleteMy most humble apologies, madame Clive. I do, as a matter of fact, understand that you were not trying to, so called, "start" anything. It's that I would rather not tend to think that this conversation we fabulous artists are having is boring. I think that it is rather interestiong indeed!
ReplyDeleteI do understand where you are coming from Mr.Menul and I also relize I can be a bit rash and speak without thinking. I also must apologize to you for my less than kind words. I would must assure you that I respect you and your work.
ReplyDeleteSorry for my absence in this discussion but these potatoes are magnificent! I couldn't stop myself from eating them! But now that they are gone I shall speak. I am sorry Ms.Clive but I can not disagree. My creativity isn't harmed because of the changing tide of economic certainty. As an actor I cannot let my person life affect my character. I discovered acting on my own and worked very hard to get to where I am today. I've had bumps in the way, but when it comes to acting I let nothing distact me (except for alcohol but that is a different story). Money doesn't stop the flow of my creativity. And you will be respected more if you work hard to get to the top then buy your way there.
ReplyDeleteWell Ciao everyone! I have to agree that the economic tide did not affect my ability to be creative, nor did it affect me in a bad way. In fact during this time i was getting paid good money for my work. Although my family was well secured with our finances from my siblings already in there career of opera singing, I dont think it is exactly necessary to be secured to be able to be an artist but it would boast your success as an artist if you were a bit secured. No offense to any of you but im sure that it was a bit of a struggle for you to come up and be successful was it not?
ReplyDeleteYes, Madame Grisi, it was quite of a struggle to become succesful, but that didn't stop moi! It made my success much more meaningful because of all the hard work and devotion that had payed off!
DeleteI was just going to mention how proud you must be for all your hard work! Its such a wonderful thing to look back onto your hard past and see how well you have become since then! KUDOS to you Mr. Mehul!
DeleteWhy thank you very much Madame Grisi!
DeleteWell to be a writer such as myself, it really does not take much money for me to be successful in creativity. But the Revolution did have much impact on my work. It inspired many ideas such as growing feminism and religious freedom.
ReplyDeleteNow I admit that it can be very difficult living in cities as a starving artist. I know that in London they look for more higher class actors to act. Its what the people want to see. You have to have the right education and exposure as well.
Ms. Inchbald, please excuse this invasion. Now I know that you kicked me out of your table earlier but i think that we can put our differences behind us. I think that in London, you could have a higher class mentor to help you gain a good reputation as I did. I came out of a low class, but found myself a mentor, and she helped me get cast. So I couldn't help but notice that you have a speech impediment. How can you be a successful actress with a speech impediment.
DeleteHow kind of you to point that out Mr. Brougham... But if you must know my husband who is also an actor helped me get my acting career started. He was very successful.
DeleteVery interesting ideas you are all coming to! I have a question to pose: Who decides what is good art and what is bad? Given that art has to be nurtured and supported (you were all trained in your craft in some way and this required resources of some kind) is it fair to say that our ideas about what is brilliant and everlasting comes from those with resources to expend?
ReplyDeleteDeciding what is good or bad art does come from those with resources to spend, but also from those who does not, because It's a very personal thing.That does not mean that those who are rich decide what is good, no no! it means each and every person decides for themselves what they like and what they don't. Even in times where they are not allowed to say it. There is millions of people out there with millions of different tastes and opinions. The important thing as an artist, I believe, is to love what you do because that would be the most amazing thing you can share. There is always going to be someone out there thinks what you do is brilliant.
DeleteIt all depends on the eyes of the beholder. Just because something might be popular and is favored by the public might not be looked at so well from someone not from here. Therefore there is no "good" or "bad" art because that opinion may change for every person who sees it.
DeleteI personally believe that the audience is who decides what good art is. Of course,the artist has some opinion on what they think is good art, but the audience Is who buys the tickets and the music. Also, the people you work with have some influence on what you think of as "good art". I think that people's ideas about what is brilliant comes from people with resources to expend because the people with the most money can put their arts out on the market for people to buy but the ones without money don't have that opportunity.
ReplyDeleteThat is a very intersting question! Although I would wish to pronounce that no one can rightfully say what good art is or what bad art is. It is all based on your own opion. What you see and hear might tend to differ from what someone else may see or hear. However If I may beg to differ Madame Lang, I disagree with you ever so suttle. Our ideas about what is brilliant does not come from people who can expend. Just because you have reasorces to expend doesn't mean that you may actually realize what is brilliant. Also Madame lang, just because you do not have money means you can not but your art on the market? I thoroughly disagree with that statement.
ReplyDeleteI have to agree with you both on some of the things you have said. Like Ms. Lange I believe that the real critics are the audience that you perform for. Although you and the audience might have totally different opinions on what you consider "good" and "bad" art. I also think your opinion is shaped by the people who influence you through your arts, you have to have some common opinions for them to influence you am i correct? With what you said Mehul no one can say whether someones art is bad or not thats just crude! Everyone has there own view on different arts.
ReplyDeleteYes indeed Madame Grisi!
DeleteI do not fully agree with Ms.Lange, the audience is not the one that truly decides. Yes some people like one type of art more than the other or even just does not favor the parts of it. The audiences come to a show expecting greatness and some times do not always see that but that does that mean the art is not good or bad.
ReplyDeleteTo your question asked earlier Madam Andreadis, I believe economy has little to do in the arts world but it does not effect the artist. Let me explain this, the artist controls the art, the people come see the art. If the people have no money, they will not be able to see the magnificent art correct? Now the artist on the other hand doesn't have to pay to see the art because they made it! Therefore, economy effects the people seeing the art yet does not effect the artist. Either way, the artist is as creative as they want to be and can be no matter how much money is put into it. It still takes some money though. You need at least a little something to make the art that you want to make.
ReplyDeleteTo your later question Ms.Andreadis I say that no-one has the right to say what good art is and what is bad! This makes me furious when people judge not only my art but other people's too! Art comes from an artists heart and shouldn't be judged just like people themselves shouldn't be, And if you don't like that then, excuse my language, kiss my... got to go...
ReplyDeleteTo add to my comment, it doesn't matter how much resources you have or how rich you are, it is plainly wrong to judge someone for what they do.
ReplyDeleteI agree and disagree with Ms. Lange. The audience does have an influence on what is "good art" and what is "bad art" but it also has to do with your talent and the amount of work you put in to better your talent. Half of your audience may think that your work is fantastic and the other half may think that your work is terrible.But if you have the talent and you work hard, it doesn't matter what your audience thinks.
ReplyDeleteI completely agree with you Mr. Shutter, I do believe you and I have more in common then we previously believed. It's been an absolute pleasure hearing your educated opinion.
DeleteThank you, Hannah. Could you pass me the steak and whiskey please.
ReplyDeleteWhy of course I can Ned. Oh dear, I can't remember, is your...wife here with you this evening?
DeleteThat's not important.
DeleteAs artists in this era, how would you feel if people that said your art was a "bad art" and had the power to take it away from you?
ReplyDeleteI would be completly furious. I can understand if people think my art is bad, but I would absolutly hate if they took away one of the things I love the most.
DeleteFrom my point of view having money does not make you any more creative that anyone else, in this era or any other. It certainly just make you richer! In any case it may help you to be focused 100% in your art rather than worried about not having food on your table. And talking about food, this food is absolutely exquisite and I just broke my dancer diet. But anyways, I believe that in order to be an artist you need three basic things and having economic stability is not one of them: Love for what you do, being constant, and wanting it more than anything else.
ReplyDeleteI like that Mr. Tagloni. Agreed...
DeleteI would be very, very upset with that person. If someone ever tried to take my art away from me, I would get it back at any cost. Taking away art from an artist is like taking away their existence to some artists like me. Play-writing and writing novels is my life and career and without it I'm nothing. It is what I love to do! What do you think about this Mr. Billing?
ReplyDeleteI believe that would extremely devastating. My art is my serious passion and growing up with nothing all I have is my piano and my family. An artist without an art is absolutely terrible and everyone with that passion in the arts should be able to do it freely with no worry.
ReplyDeleteWell Mr.Billings your comment brings up an interesting point, what is an artist without their art? If you art has been taken away it leaves a person empty an unfulfilled. Art should not be something that can be defined as good or bad it should be something the artist does to make them happy.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you Ms.Clive. Art is my life. Without acting I would be a drunk asking for money on the corners of the Covent Garden.
DeleteYes. I agree with both Ms. Clive and Mr. Shutter. I love acting so much and I'm sure I would be nothing without it... Ok, I'm sure I would be somthing. I always believed that if I didn't act, I would be a model for some famous artist. As many of you don't know, I love portraits of myself. But, I'd rather be doing what I do now.
DeleteI am so glad to see that we agree that money doesn't define your talent. If you have the passion for your art and you are talented, you really shouldn't need money or your audiences (even though it helps) to define if your art is good or bad.I feel that even though some artists aren't that talented we all have some kind of talent. Without art we would be nothing and I am glad that all of us are so passionate about what we do. It has been a pleasure talking to all of you and maybe one day we can all meet again.
ReplyDelete