Recently, I had a pile (most appropriate word) of wonderful people in my house. My home has been host to groups that make me feel... full? Happy, in any case. Many people, some who've known each other forever, some who've never met each other before, all eating lasagna and laughing endlessly. We were gathered around a television, but rather than being a replacement, it was the background and occasionally spring-point for conversation. I had not realised how important that sense of chaotic connection was to me. Admittedly, some of the joy was in having three incredibly hot girls (PLUS my lover) all cuddled up to me, giggling, and squwooshing their squwooshy bits up against me, I won't lie. That made it especially nice. People were especially nice. Their enjoyment fueled mine.
And I wasn't the center (at least, I don't think), not in the way I usually am. I may have set the night in motion, but then could sit back and watch the interactions. I didn't have to struggle anymore.
I need more people that I love. I need to focus more outside of myself. I thought that, as I was in college, I needed to become more selfish, focusing only on what would propel me further. But I think, for my happiness, I need to give more to other people. I'm too much in my own head, and create for myself more stress that should be feasible. No more panic for a while, Sata, okay?
Now, concerns about art. Why has graphic art been confused with high art? That is, on one side, we have people exploring the functions of media and idea, and on the other side we have people using media to express story or intent. Call me asshole, but comic book art is generally not displayable beside Cezanne or Warhol even. The difference is in categorisation and in intent of piece. That isn't to say that no graphic art ever crosses over into high art. Only that this should be the exception, and that graphic art's purpose be maintained primarily at conveying a story or persuasive intent and, in the end, making a buck. Fine art, high art, whatever, is and should be more internal. Respect an object or effort for what it is and what it was created to be. Because someone can create the most amazing graphic does not mean they are comparable (I did not say "better" -- I'm talking about true comparability, apples to oranges style) to old Renaissance masters.
I am particularly talking about the DeviantArt crowd, the convention crowd, and even my own group's materials. The rampant self-importance among this crowd has made me seriously rethink my goals of creating a publishing company. I don't think I want to do Demon Fart Cabbage at this rate. Of course, what else am I going to do?
Also on art, I have been following this story: http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/National-Press-Club-Shepard-Fairey/photo//090204/480/0045032f19d94d3caf545341a38b303c//s:/ap/20090204/ap_en_ot/obama_poster and http://www.oculture.com/2009/02/the_obama_hope_poster_the_new_copyright_controversy.html . Whatever happens in this will change our interpretation of art and legal standing of such for a damn long time, and the issue should have attention paid to it.
I have avoided my mid-term essay long enough. Incidentally, if anyone knows of a peer-reviewed article discussing the Eisenstein-style conflict present in the film Cet obscur objet du desir, I'd be very grateful for a hint.