While waiting for my dinner tonight I wrote this in my planner:
The PURSUIT of SELF KNOWLEDGE
We spend our lives trying to fit a mold, be it society's, our own, our relatives, friends, lovers. We spend our lives trying to be something and never succeeding. We're told if we let go we can find contentment. What if contentment is really just satisfaction in failure?
Many great artists suffered their [entire] lives due to their dissatisfaction with failure. They refused to do anything displeasing to them, anything that degraded/ made them less than an artist. You could say they led miserable lives because they never knew face, wealth, or even comfort, but they had the satisfaction of knowing they were true to themselves.
Perhaps when the forefathers promised us "the pursuit of happiness" they actually meant the right to be self-aware and confident in that. If we could know who we are, what we want, strive for those things, and actually end up happy that would just be a fantastic little bonus, but if not we could always have the knowledge that we gave ourselves our all [because at the end of the day that's the best we can do and sometimes the only person we can please].
Nice. I liked this. Very true, too; I agree. "You could say they led miserable lives because they never knew face, wealth, or even comfort, but they had the satisfaction of knowing they were true to themselves." <--I totally believe this, as well. I think that's what made them different from all the "wannabe artists" who wanted/want fortune and glory. (A nice bonus, but not the real reason for their art.) Hoot! <-I dunno, I thought I'd end it like that...
ReplyDeleteActually, that's a point. I was thinking about watered down artists yesterday - Andy Warhol (later), Limp Bizkit (they were created to feed off of Insane Clown Posse's success), and I had another good art example... Anyway, I was thinking of them versus artists who were true to themselves and a tad eccentric due to it - Van Gogh (the relationship and/or mental issues) and again I had a list... either way, they were honest. They're work was sometimes really difficult to look at/ take in/ understand because it hit a place deeper than most commercialized art. It hit at the core of being and that's difficult to sell. People don't want to look into themselves and they certainly don't want someone else, an artist none-the-less, being the instrument used. People are weird about being honest.
ReplyDeleteI totally agree. LOL. I didn't know that Limp Bizkit was made to chomp off ICP's success. I did figure they were just another prepackaged slice of "alternative rock for today's expressive youth." Such bunk. I'm with you, Jenna. I love Van Gogh for that reason, as well. Gauguin was pretty crazy, too, and seemed devoted to his art, as well..:D
ReplyDeleteOne of my com classes actually discussed how Limp Bizkit was packaged. We watched a video on it. It's no longer in my YouTube favorites (as this was senior year) but I'm sure it's still on YouTube. I want to say it was a PBS special... I need to get more up to date on Gauguin, honestly. I'll google him to start. Is it a him?
ReplyDelete