@ 4:20pm, idm-digest-help@hyperreal.org at idm-digest-help@hyperreal.org
wrote:
artists should get what they can get while they can get it, just like
anybody else should and it can b done tastefully even though there is no
accounting 4 taste - just check out my movie/music collection (no
britney spears or boy bands though, happy 2 say).
who is anybody 2 say what is art and what is not? as uncreative as most
pop is even an imitation can b a form of expression and u can't separate
expression and art (u can if u want, knock yourself out. it's just a
waste of time). it might not b good art, but who is 2 say what is good art
either? it's all subjective, relative, and culturally biased. is all
art "good"? is all idm i, d and/or m?
if art can b found in nature then it can b found in any of nature's
creatures. some more so than others but that's all open 2 interpretation
just like the definition of art, which is a subject i'd rather not
discuss s i don't care about a textbook definition, i know what it
means 2 me.
as long as there r people 2 buy into the hype they r gonna flood the
market wit' flavor of the month xeroxes, but everybody buys into
something so who cares what it is really.
in closing, relax and don't lose sleep over such nonsense.
quoted 6 lines that's why i don't
>> that's why i don't
>> think artists should be paid more than it costs to produce the art.
>
> this is true. but how do you pay for the time invested in it? someone ha=
> d
> to write the stuff, good or bad!