Dec 06, 2005 - 0 Comments - Uncategorized -

A word about Eyecandy

“C’mon Pinocchio, stop trying to express profound thoughts with art and come join the circus with us!”

Download parameter file patina03.loo

I never thought Sir Sterlingware would produce such a sugary lollipop as this, but here it is.

I can still remember shifting the last slider on the color controls that brought this crunchy confectionary into sharp focus.

I’ve got some other variations which are harsher and more artistic, echoing the more wholesome, fiber rich and nutritious stuff I usually like.

I think our minds have various capacities or appetites. We all like fractal eyecandy, bright, supersaturated, magazine cover artwork, but some of us don’t care for very much of it.

Others have more of a sweet tooth and like to linger all day in that warm glow of rich, candy-bar color.

There’s a fractal calendar that has been criticized by some for having mainly fruity, eyecandy content. It’s popular, people pay money to have a copy of it, bookstores and distributors make room for it on their shelves.

But I guess most consumers of art probably aren’t artists, so our opinions are more or less irrelevant. Would you buy your own work? Artists are poor judges of consumable merchandise.

Anyhow, I’ve come to realize that people are wired differently. There’s no such thing as a single standard of excellence in art.

Differences of opinion are a sign of honesty and maturity within a group of people.

Not everyone responds with joy at the same works of art. That’s why there’s so much variety in art: differening interests lead to different styles and subject matter.

I’ve really wondered over the years how stuff that I think is pointless can be found genuinely appealing by other people. I don’t think they’re faking it, anymore. I’m convinced there are varieties of artistic taste, for some unknown reason, and that’s all there is to it.

Well, I don’t know. Making art is easier than explaining it.