My backyard

Maybe it's coz I'm not an art student, but it seems a little crazy to me that you could be a fantastic artist and completely fail NCEA art because of a lack of paper work.

Is the Mona Lisa less of a master piece because we don't have all the records of why it was painted in such a way and how? And a time management plan saying when Leonardo worked on it and how long for?

If NCEA was applied to real life we wouldn't have Penicillen because when it was discovered he would have been told that it wasn't valid because he hadn't followed correct procedures and didn't have the necessary calculations etc.

I think the results should speak for themselves, at least partially.

Yeah but we already knew NCEA should go play hide and go fuck yourself a long time ago.

Ok, NCEA entirely aside, darling, school art classes do not create great artwork. Real, big old and ugly, professional, talented artists who have been through the system and out the other fucking side create artwork that's actually good, after a number of years...

School art lost my confidence when the art teacher liked my work enough to buy it off me but couldn't give me a grade that reflected that because that wasn't what we were being marked on.

Apparently I was too creative or something.

Not to blame Ms Nadene of course, she was lovely

how much did she pay you?

$60, $20 for every hour I "worked" on it.

I object to Hannah's comment- not that school can't create good art (because it's probably true) but the idea that young people cannot create good art work, because they most definately can! Admittedly a lot of people who claim to be artists are crap, but that is not reserved to either art or youth, I mean christ look at David Hamilton!!

Yes certain skills are aquired over time (I'm talking purely technical skills) but that is the same in any artistic domain, whether visaul art, music or fictional writting and we accept that young people can be proficant at those.

No. No they can't. Firstly, because skills take time to develop, and secondly, because for art (of any form) to have real impact and value it needs to have that depth of experience and knowledge behind it. Young people can create art that is good for someone so young, they can create art that shows promise, but they can't create truly good art. Full fucking stop.

I just noticed my new rank.

You bitch(es).

so slow Logan

As for young people creating art, I think they can create art as long as it is to a level of knowledge that they posess. Same as a talented child might be able to write superb stories for children their age and younger, but their attempts to write for an older audience would be amature and immature. I think it's the same with art, a talented child can create art for people their age and younger and it may be better in the eyes of younger viewers because the artist understands them better, unfortunately there isn't much of a market for art for kids (not pictures of nursery rhymes and things to put on the walls in kids bedrooms but actual art with meaning) so I think that's why it seems that children and young people can't create art.

As for skills taking time to develope, yes they do, but there are always those individuals that are exceptional, if we see these individuals in music and writing ten why not art?

My two cents is thus: Young people make crap art in any genre, whether or not they are technically proficient.

However, I challenge the definition of "young" as defined by physical age. Therefore those who are physically young may be sufficiently mature (at least in some respects) to create good art.

Oh, and stick-pearls? Would you bloody well log off when you're done!

oh just give away who you are Love!! But I agree with you mostly about young people/art.

(Assuming that both old and young are considered talented)
Hannah you are being an idiot if you think that being older (and possible more mature, because those things do not automatically accompany each other.) makes you more creative, intelligent or imaginative. (More inspired and experianced I give you) the young are far more expressive and try more things, thus it comes down to what you consider is the making of good art...technique and experiance, or themes, expression and new ideas.

A relative of Bry's!!!

... Who's doing the giving away here?

... And why on earth hasn't Logan guessed already?!?!

Being older gives you life experience. Full bloody stop. Being young means you lack life experience. Full bloody stop. Are you saying that mature artists don't innovate? Ummm, open your eyes, look around at what mature, adult artists are doing. Of course I agree that age doesn't necessarally equal maturity, so I guess I really mean 'mature' rather than 'adult'. But as a general rule, teenage wannabe artists are not mature, because they haven't been around long enough to get the kind of experience necessary to become mature, they haven't lived enough.

My thumb hurts

congrats

Can I PULLLEEEEEEEEEEEZZZZZZZZZZZZ Have my old rank back?

I'll have to have a wee chat with Hannah, methinks.

Ugh she'll say no

Awws. The novelty'll wear off at some stage ... in the unforeseeable future ... possibly ...

You can have you old rank back when that one ceases to be funny. Or possibly a new, shiny, similarly insulting rank if I find reason to give you one.

The moderators of the nutshell do not in any way endorse the senseless abuse of modly powers in any way, shape or form. Thank you for reading this message.

Do it! Dooooooooooo iiiiiiiiitttt!!!!!!!!

What a lovely little clause, but I think what you mean is:

Joining this forum requires you allow the moderators to use their moderly powers in any way they see fit to insult, harrass, exclude or abuse you. By posting on this forum you have accepted this and any other terms that the moderators have deemed or may deem worthwhile in the future. This forum is not responsible for any mood swings or mental illnesses you may suffer resulting from the content of the forum.