Man turns dead cat into a Helicopter

Confab wrote: »

Artists are unproductively imaginative. An engineer or chemist imagines and creates something useful. An artist shits on a tray and calls it 'imaginative' and 'pushing the limits'.

Pushing the limits? Yeah. Of your rectum.

Who do you think pushes fashions and movements but artists? They are allowed to go crazy and do what they like and then once they have their ideas out there, they scale it back to something more reasonable. That's just talking about product design though.

If anything that's the way they're expressing themselves, you don't have to like it or even pay attention to it but for those that do, they like it.

I've studied art and we had to acknowledge that the people who don't get art or even see the point of it are the first to condemn it. Even if they're not capable of creating something of their own.

Everyone has different tastes but as long as it means something to the artist, that's ALL that matters.

And where are you getting the sh1t thing from anyway? That's such a desperate way to validate your argument.

Go on see how dull a world without artists would be; boring buildings,artwork,clothes,furniture etc.

The world needs creative people, even if it's to take the edge off things.

LordSmeg wrote: »

I'm not a very creative person if I speak negatively about artists ? Less imagination and more logic might be more helpful there.

Could I have thought of it ? Yes, anyone could have but most people wont do it because its nothing other than what it is. Turning a dead cat into a helicopter for a bit of a laugh. Certain people though convinced of their own genius do these things and then assign it some kind of importance or meaning.

Let me be an artist for a second. I'm going to cremate a dead crow and throw the ashes into a glass of water, add a straw and umbrella. I'll call it life and death and the effect of materialism on nature. If I was further up my own hole I'd be able to convince myself this was something other than burning a dead bird and throwing it in water. But it would be me thinking I am fantastic for having thought of it.

If he wanst to motorise his cat then thats his business, but once its called art and stuck on display it really shows the artist for what they are. Someone with too much time on their hands and an oversized ego.

what makes you think that? You're great for the assumptions alright.
They're doing what they like, this is creative as apposed to just mounting the cat on the wall and watching it.

And you would never succeed in being an artist if you thought you'd have to have a massive ego to create artwork.
Not all artists follow this movement and draw, paint and sculpt amazing things in the "conventional way".
The only reason why these people are branching out is because that form of art has been done to death so they want change and something different.


If you think it's so easy to succeed in art then by all means go ahead. You wouldn't be the first fool to think that and fail. If you don't have vision and talent, you won't get anywhere quickly buddy.

The cock came before the pussy.....



Proper order too.

Confab wrote: »

Anything and everything can be interpreted as art. But art in itself is commercial. So artists try to shock the public's jaded palate. 'Pushing the limits' is another way of saying for 'pull in the punter'. Let's face it, artists are no different to a retail establishment.

that's exactly why they want to push the limits. Once people get used to a particular style it becomes boring! Artists are not boring people, they just want to try different things and experiment with an infinite varity of stuff because the can. You'll never see things go stagnant because creative people can't be subdued, it's just not in their nature and they won't allow it.

Artists are no different to a retail establishment? The amount of artists that work just for themselves outnumbers any professional artists hugely.
You're not creative, it's just hard for someone like you to understand the mindset of someone who is.
What you're saying is that you want artists to be 'normal' but then everything becomes the same and boring with no individuality. It's like if the world said "ok, no more new clothes designs EVER!" would you be ok with that?

I'm a creative guy and I have the talent to sell my art but that doesn't mean I do. I draw,paint,sculpt for me only.
Does that mean I'm more subdued than these artists? No , I myself try to push the limits and express my ideas in artwork even if it is controversial.

Artistic moments are no different than cultural or social ones. They need visionaries to lead them.

Who knew that the coalescence of two useless things could create something so awesome.
artist + dead cat = catcopter.

mad.

I want a bear car.

LordSmeg wrote: »

Then why do we have exhibits ? Why do people put things on display ?

Poets ? Plenty of them do, do you read much modern poetry ? Most poets both want to capture something and then show everyone else what they have done. But there is such a hugely staggering difference between a good writer and what they create and this guy sticking a cat to a helicopter. Same as the gap between a talented painter and what they create and someone throwing paint at the canvas.

Your last bit sums up art to be honest. If someone doesnt like it they dont understand it. Cat nailed to a tree ? You dont understand what its like to be creative. Shít smeared on the wall ? You dont understand the meaning behind it. Reminds me of religion, no matter what you say about it those too blind to see it for what it is will never listen.

I had something more in depth written but my iPad went dead. So I'm going to try to be concise about this.

Jackson Pollock was "someone throwing paint at the canvas" and he was an amazing artist. His artwork expresses his emotions through paint and movement and it is very interesting for just "paint thrown at a canvas".
His art was simple but hugely expressive and he achieved this through a seemingly simple technique that just shows his barebones ideas and thoughts without any conventional beauty masking them. But that is what makes it beautiful, because of it's unconventional beauty.

Sure there is an element of exhibitionism but that is brought about by pride in your work and needing a means to support and feed your talent and creativity.
It is not the thing that motivates artists to create work because you can only create when motivated and feel like expressing yourself.
I'm sure you think it would be easy to draw any old thing if you're established but the artists care about their work and it's actually VERY difficult to paint for the sake of painting (not that you'd know) and the end result shows this.
It's like a craftsman rushing his work with no care or interest in the end product.

So you think art like this is pointless and stupid? Who the fck are you to make such a statement? It's like when guys bitch about a players performance when they themselves couldn't kick a ball to save their lives or when someone criticises a singer when they can't sing.
That point you make about religion is so stupid. Religion is either right or wrong, art is created by people and can be seem and appreciated in different ways. Whereas religion can only be right or wrong because it's an absolute. God is either real or not so its not even comparable to art.

You're a very ignorant guy and this isn't the first time we've come to blows either. My best advise to you is to not make such sweeping statements about things that you're not wired to understand. You're more than entitled to your own opinion but don't throw down and devalue art just because it's not your thing or because you can't see the point of it.
Other people enjoy and appreciate it. Why do you have to come around and basically say "wtf is this sh1t?!"

1ZRed wrote: »

[/I][/B]

I had something more in depth written but my iPad went dead. So I'm going to try to be concise about this.

Jackson Pollock was "someone throwing paint at the canvas" and he was an amazing artist. His artwork expresses his emotions through paint and movement and it is very interesting for just "paint thrown at a canvas".
His art was simple but hugely expressive and he achieved this through a seemingly simple technique that just shows his barebones ideas and thoughts without any conventional beauty masking them. But that is what makes it beautiful, because of it's unconventional beauty.

So everyone who throws paint at a canvas is a new Jackson Pollock are they ? I can throw paint at a canvas am I Jackson Pollock ? Or would you class me as someone just throwing paint at a canvas for the sake of throwing paint at a canvas. Anyone can call themselves an artist because anything can be deemed art. turning a cat into a helicopter is not equitable to a Jackson Pollock painting. Its someone who needs to rely on shock value or unconventionality to sell their work not use their work to push the boundaries simply because of what they are.

There are talented painters out there who work in abstraction. But that doesnt mean that everyone who does it or that is famous for it are talented and visionaries. I'm not arguing against art itself here I'm arguing against artists who place more meaning and worth into something than is actually in it. You might have picked up on this if you didnt feel the need to go off on a protect the artists crusade.

Sure there is an element of exhibitionism but that is brought about by pride in your work and needing a means to support and feed your talent and creativity.
It is not the thing that motivates artists to create work because you can only create when motivated and feel like expressing yourself.
I'm sure you think it would be easy to draw any old thing if you're established but the artists care about their work and it's actually VERY difficult to paint for the sake of painting (not that you'd know) and the end result shows this.
It's like a craftsman rushing his work with no care or interest in the end product.

A craftsman knows his job and creates what will sell, he doesnt make products that wont sell. Art is no different and you are extremely naive if you think artists work solely on passion and a need to express themselves with no care as to how it will be received.

So you think art like this is pointless and stupid? Who the fck are you to make such a statement? It's like when guys bitch about a players performance when they themselves couldn't kick a ball to save their lives or when someone criticises a singer when they can't sing.
That point you make about religion is so stupid. Religion is either right or wrong, art is created by people and can be seem and appreciated in different ways. Whereas religion can only be right or wrong because it's an absolute. God is either real or not so its not even comparable to art.

Yes I think art like this is pointless. As pointless as me nailing a shoe to the wall. If someone gets a laugh out of it then grand because thats all it is. An odd, funny momentary thing. Its not anything revolutionary or something to be admired for the bravery of the artist and the vision and creativity to bring it into being. Its a cat helicopter that anyone other than an artist would chuckle at, show their friends and stick it in the garage. When you get someone stuck up their own hole though it becomes much more than that. Meaning is attributed to it, it much be analyse and put on display for everyone to see the genius.

The Religion comparison isnt stupid. You are no different than a priest telling me I dont understand the meaning and worth of the bible because I havent found jesus. Its not an absolute its dependant on someone's view point and the worth they attribute to it. To a religious person religion cannot be wrong, any proof of the fact can be written off as the work of the devil. The exact same as you writing off my opinion because you think I'm not creative, I dont understand what its like. Its the same fcukin argument as your peddling here.

You're a very ignorant guy and this isn't the first time we've come to blows either. My best advise to you is to not make such sweeping statements about things that you're not wired to understand. You're more than entitled to your own opinion but don't throw down and devalue art just because it's not your thing or because you can't see the point of it.
Other people enjoy and appreciate it. Why do you have to come around and basically say "wtf is this sh1t?!"

I'm very ignorant, who the fcuk am I ? You're a very hostile, arrogant and insulting person. You feel the need to insult people who disagree with you, write off their arguments as ignorant and proclaim it cannot be understood by someone who isnt an artist. Because you havent the capability to understand other people can have valid opinions.

I am entitled to my own opinion but why do I have to express it ? While your arguing about the wonderfulness of expressing ones self in art and how any old crap is meaningful and amazing ? I dont even know why I am bothering talking to you to be honest.

Recycling is good

There's been reports of pilots seeing the cat flying in international flight zones.

One pilot - who was visibly shaken by the experience - said, "I taut I taw a puddy cat a creepin' up on me. I did! I taw a puddy cat as plain as he could be."