Quote:
Originally Posted by Ninetales
No, she is cited on all except for Diamonds, Jump and Stay.
|
Aww man if she had wrote Stay I would have so much more respect for her. Still an incredible song though.
Quote:
Originally Posted by duga
That's a good point...I never thought about it that way. Of course, you could still argue that some people can "paint by numbers" so to speak. For example, taking a course and one of the projects is "how to paint a sunset". Are you still an artist at that point?
|
I'm not sure. It's so complicated. My own personal definition of art is an expression that captures the soul. Van Gogh's my favourite painter because you look at his work and even if it's just a picture of the sky at night or some flowers there's unmistakably part of him within it. So even if you had to paint that sunset for a class, it's still art if you can create it in you're own way with feeling and emotion.
Songs can be 'art' even if they're not original, it's the depth of the interpretation that matters. That's why folk standards that have been around for a hundred years are still being sung today, and those performances are still beautiful.
But that'd all sound like pretentious mumbo jumbo to a lot of people. I'm doing a module on 'Aesthetics' at university, the examination of the ideas behind what we find beautiful. It's really interesting, when you think about it, like what even is beauty? That's an almost impossible question.
I think one thing that bogs down this sort of conversation is the fact people think calling something 'art' is a sort of praise. Art can be art but still suck. People are too quick to pigeonhole the stuff they dislike.