Sketchbook

Today I had a discussion about what art really means because my dad let my little sister paint on one of his friends old paintings from his "bad art" phase. He seemed to think it was okay because even his friend would admit it was a bad painting. It seems like sound logic at first glance, but I still winced when I saw the picture of my little sister standing proudly in front of someone else's painting with her drawings all over it.

This is why;
- It was teaching her that it's okay to ruin another person's art just because she thinks it's "bad"
- It teaches her that respect for other people's creations comes second to herself
- Art is the expression of the artist at a particular point in time, their emotions, point of view, and experience. It's not a reflection of the person who owns it. Any number of people can own a work of art and it doesn't change depending on the owner. It's meant to preserve the point in time of it's creation and it's creator unless otherwise stated.
- His friend entrusted him with his art out of a hope that he would provide a good home for it. Part of being entrusted with art is an agreement to respect it and keep it safe.
- Later in life his friend might want to see his "bad art" as a reminder of what he had to go through at one point
- It's letting her take credit for someone else's work and creativity just because he added some things to it. It's pretty much like signing your name on someone else's homework and then taking the grade for it. No matter how pretty and impressive your signature is, it's still someone else's homework.

The conversation was really enlightening. I think I understand better what art actually is now. In reasoning out why I had such a sickening gut reaction to such a cute seeming project, I figured out what art actually means to me besides a display of skill. Art is what we create to remember things and to be remembered. It's a reflection of a moment, or the creator's environment, feelings, skill, experience, life...

I was asked why altering clothing is okay, but altering art isn't. My response was,

"Ordinary clothing is meant to be worn, ripped, altered, painted, etc. It's meant to be a reflection of the person wearing it, not the person who designed it. Altering clothing is a way of expressing your individuality onto something that would otherwise look the same as everything else and lack unique style.
Art, on the other hand, is unique from the get go and reflects the person who made it, not the person who currently owns it. Any number of people can own a work of art and the art doesn't look different depending on the owner. It's a creation from an individual expressing that individual's view of the world and personal emotions and experiences at that specific time.
More specifically, a person who respects art would never cut up or alter a designer piece of clothing specifically made by a fashion designer as a work of art, because it is meant to reflect the designer's sense of style and personality. That's one of the main reasons I don't wear designer clothing. It's not meant to express the wearer's individuality, it's meant to express a specific person's or label's ideal of beauty and fashion. It's a work of art, meaning that it captures a specific view and personality at a moment and is meant to preserve it for others to see."

This explains a lot of my anger towards the conformity of clothing and store labels in junior high and high school that I didn't fully understand before now.
Anyway, I was glad for the opportunity to really think about what art means to me, because I feel like I loose sight of that a lot in the rush to complete assignments and gain skill.

Thank you Dad. I can always count on you for some really interesting discussions and realizations about life.
Just, please don't let Gabrielle-ly-belly draw on more of anyone else's paintings.
:P