[Lunatique]

toast!- He's one of my best friends, and I've known him for over 16 years. If he's dyslexic, believe me, I would know. There's no sign of him being dyslexic at all.

[gekitsu]

malachi: i don't recall the name but it was one of those super artsy-fartsy action artists. he threw a dead cow out of a heli and *splash* that was art.

[Aaron]

Lunatique. Your friend has been drawing for sixteen years, all the time, and can't draw past the level of a fifteen year old? Please don't be offended by this, but like toast said, he may have a learning disability. Every human body and face has basic shapes that anyone should be able to memorize. There are rules to everything in art, perspective and shading, and I've noticed that once I learn the rules I can do it. It sounds like your friend's problem is with learning, not talent. He would be the only person I've heard of with that problem.

[oDD]

Lunatique: could you show us his works? i'm very curious.
_________________
portfolio | art blog

[Lunatique]

I doubt he's got a learning disability. He loves everything Japanese, and he managed to learn to speak fluent Japanese on his own by being completely self-taught. He can also remember every porn actresses's name from America to Japan. He's managed to learn how to build architecture in 3DS Max, and animate fly-throughs. Now, if he's got some kind of learning disability, 3D, one of the most technically complex things for an artists to do, should be completely beyond his reach. He also learned flash, dreamweaver..etc, and worked at a webdesign company for a while. He can write fluently in Chinese, but his English suffers(even though he lived in the States from 14~28 ). This is purely because he doesn't really try since he's more interested in learning Japanese. So, yeah, no disability as far as I can tell.

His inability to pick up creative things extends to music as well. He would love to be able to play an instrument, but despite my numerous efforts to teach him throughtout the years guitar, keyboard, and drums, he showed no innate ability to grasp rhythm at all. Even drumming his fingers to the beat of a song is a struggle for him.

What he does have, is the ability to visualize imagery and motion like many of us who are into art and film. He could describe his vision in full detail, but he could never put it down on paper properly.

I can't show his work because I don't have any, and he doesn't have a website. He's busy these days working in the entertainment industry helping out his TV producer parents in Taiwan, and we haven't been in touch for about a year now. The bitch doesnt' even return emails. He's gonna owe me a lot of drinks next time I see him.

Yes, he sounds like a rare case, but he's probably the only one I know who doesn't improve at a normal rate like everyone else who takes art seriously. But good for him that he never really gives up. Everytime I see him, he's got new sketches in his sketchbook.

[Aaron]

Lunatique, Oh! Then it's obvious! He's watching way too much porno

[bearsclover]

I believe that there are a few people (like Lunatique's friend) who will just never get it. Or rather, that the talents they wish for, they don't have. They probably do have (and in Lunatique's friend, certainly does have) talents, but just not in certain areas. (I guess a lot of us suffer from this, though, when you think about it.)

I have a friend who, while not as bad off as Lunatique's friend, has some "problems". Very talented, to be sure. And I think in her case, it might be partly her attitude that holds her back. (I don't know if she has accepted that she, well, sucks at certain things.) She has little knack for color. Just doesn't "get" it. Doesn't understand expressive line, either. Yikes. And yet she has integrated color and line into her work, with embarrassing (in my opinion) results. But she won't accept that she needs to improve. At least not as far as I know.

But in other areas? She's awesome. Excellent design sense, (something I have less of a knack for) and excellent at abstract geometric designs. Just fabulous. She's a very talented, able person. But just not good in everything. Who is, though? I am woefully aware of some of my artistic weaknesses. We all are.

I think in her case, she very well may be able to "loosen up" in her color and linework with proper practice and education. I don't know for sure, but I wouldn't dismiss the possibility. She'd have to accept that she sucks in color and line, and she'd have to want to improve in these areas. She might not ever do either things. In which case, fine. She's doesn't have to be good in everything. None of us do.

She also can't carry a tune, but deludes herself into thinking that she has a "beautiful voice". Yikes once again.
_________________
Madness takes its toll - please have exact change.

[Maura]

Ooh, this is interesting, some of you people have good minds.

Ummm...this has already been said, but I'm sayin it anyways, maby I'll shed some new light. You can't write a stistic on what's more important in art, because that changes from person to person. Even from piece to piece, depending on what the point of creating a specific piece is. If you're copying or immitating something for whatever reason, creativity isn't much of a factor. But if you want to express somerthing deeper for just yourself, than it has to be creative, otherwise you're not really expressing something. It wouldn't need to be technically good, because you're not showing it to anyone. But for general things, I think it's a good thing to aim for 50:50, so it doesn't stifle your immagination, and looks respectable to other people ("follow the middle path, blah blah blah").

I do think creativity is an innate thing that can't be learned, only inticed. Original thought is so important in art, because without it, your work is boring. Original thought is important in every field (with the exception of things accounting I guess), like math, science, literature, etc., because it takes things to a higher level. Without it, everything's just meteocre. But without skill and experience, you can't express your creative thought, and people around you won't be able to recognize your ideas very well.

I find this so frustrating, because people are so focused on how well you paint, but not what you're actually painting. I think I have a pretty creative mind, but it's like no one notices. I have great ideas, but I can't always get them out to the skill that I need to acurately express my ideas. I'm sure it's just as frustrating for the other side, and people at that extreme are probably like , but it's really just the same for creatively oriented people as the other extreme.
_________________
http://mauram.com

[Torstein Nordstrand]

I really don't want to do this discussion again, there are so many underdeveloped strong "opinions" going around, but for those that think that artists are born with something special that all artists share, please consider:

Talent is, first and foremost, a word. Humans created that word to express the feeling we get when we encounter an individual with skills we cannot account for.

A: "Oh my god look at that kid, he sure can hit the ball better than anyone else on his team! He sure is an amazingly talented young boy!"

B: "If you knew how his father is driving him, you wouldn't be that surprised anymore. Poor kid. Good with a bat, though."

C: "Oh. Well, he is skilled anyway."


Da Vinci and Michelangelo both knew, and expressed, that mastery of things was a result of intense work and relentless effort, sacrifice and inquisitiveness. Just because we do not understand how people work, doesn't make it "magic".

Our genetics play a part in our definition, but that is not what stops you from being a successful artist. What you do and do not, does indeed. And that should be everyone's focus, no matter what goals one sets for oneself.

Cheers,
_________________
www.torsteinnordstrand.com

[Maura]

I wasen't really refering to talent as an innate ability to draw, I was thinking more about talent as creativity or original thought.

Talent can deffinately be learned, people obviously get better with experience. There are prodogies out there who learn at a much quicker speed than most people, but it's still learned. Creativity can't be learned, only harnessed, because it's orginal, and no one can teach you how to be original, because then you'd just be repeating what you've learned, and :. not orinial.

Torstien: If you don't want to get into this topic again, why are you
_________________
http://mauram.com

[Lunatique]

No one said that talent is the only factor. We can all agree that hard work and persistence are major factors as well, but to absolutely deny the existence of talent or the relevance of it is just too extreme.

Here's a question for people that doesn't seem to believe that talent makes a difference:

Would you say that it takes talent to be a world class composer, musician, writer, dancer, athlete..etc?

Anyone that plays or writes music can tell you that talent is a very obvious and crucial thing for music. Students at Juilliard are fiercely competitive. They all practice so damn hard and strives to be the absolute best. So why is it that some people just shocks the rest with their ability? They can perform extremely complex pieces in their respective intrument with such emotion and flawless technique that other students couldn't even attempt, no matter how hard they practiced. Some people can just "hear" original melodies in their head and be able to compose such beautiful music, while others can play all the Bach, Mozart, Beethoven they could get their hands on, but comes up totally empty when trying to compose an original piece of music. Mozart, Bach, Beethoven, paco de lucia..etc--tell me talent isn't at play there.

In writing, no one can deny the true talents of incredible writers. Their minds and command of their respective language is just stunning. You can take all the creative writing courses in the world and not be able to write like those Pulitzer Award winning writers. It's not as simple as having lived through a rich life either. Some people have an innate ability to empathize and feel things that they've never been through. Not all the incredible writers have lived through wars or social unrest, yet they can write such incredibly moving literature dealing with those subject matters. Shakepeare, Charles Dickens, Victor Hugo, Leo Tolstoy, Fyodor Dostoevsky..etc--tell me talent isn't at play there.

In dance or sports, thousands and millions of people around the world train with their lives to become the best. They eat, sleep, dream, and live dance and sports, and compete fiercely as amateurs and professionals. Then why is it we have amazing talents that breaks world records that simply remains untouched for decades? Nadia Comaneci, Michael Jordan, Mohamed Ali, Rudolph Nureyev..etc--tell me talent is not at play here.

If you can agree that talent plays a part in music, writing, dance, and sports, then why is it all of a sudden a different story for art? Does art require less talent to master? Is art a special case that doesn't require talent?

[Vhy]

I'm not going to say there is no such a thing as talent, but art history shows us that the same person who produces great work can fail over and over.

[Swami]

.Leonardo da Vinci.
"Leonardo DaVinci was a great painter, designer, scientist, futurist and thinker. He also had the gift of dyslexia."

http://www.dyslexia.com/leonardo.htm






For more peoples and info:
http://www.dyslexia.com/qafame.htm

[Lionel]

Well I am dyslexic and I have never had any problems with my drawing. But you have to bear in mind that dyslexic is a term that seems to cover a huge range of issues. With me I basically can't spell at all but I don't have to many problems with other things. I read in kind of a funny way but hell it seems to work . I have never heard of a dyslexic having problems with drawing but like I said dyslexia is a big word that seems to cover a huge range of dysabilaties (including being stupid ). Like all these things although being dyslexic has its drawbacks I can't say it has really stopped me academically in any ways after all I have managed to get a computing degree. Far to many people seem to be using it as an excuse for doing poorly at school etc. If you are a genuine dysleic (and there seem to be few of thouse) in my experience you can work round your problems if you are determined enough. Sorry this has turned into a bit of a rant anyway I am unconvinced about dyslexic being an excuse for anything let alone drawing.

I always thing anyone can become can reach a reasnoble level of drawing just like anyone can be a reasnoble mathmetican but to be a good artist you need to have some natural ability and to be a great artist means you have to have some talent and a f load practice. It is the same for just about any thing in life be it physics music or english. People are not just born great.

[c]

i agree with lunatique. talent, like any other human trait can be graphed across a bell curve. some people have lots, some don't, but MOST people can get by with whatever talent they have with hard work and a positive attitude.

i believe in talent because i believe i'm talented, i know it exists in me and it's something i am very grateful for. it's not a result of massive hard work and determination either (sorry, i'm so ashamed), because until recently i haven't done much in way of artwork...

hmm, what was my point..

i FIRMLY believe that ANYONE can learn to draw and paint and draw and paint WELL, but like malachi was trying to say (i think).. you can't learn to be an 'artist', because being an artist is about having a certain vision or ability to create new out of the old. fundamentally, this isn't something you can teach like multiplication tables. what could you possibly say? 'if you want to be creative, do A and B and then C'. it'd be like trying to describe a sunset to a blind man. it's just something that needs to be seen/felt/understood by oneself.

personally, i feel bad for luna's friend... and other people i know like him. wait, what am i saying, i should be feeling bad for myself. i got 12 color charts (schmid style) to do this week, ack!
_________________
www.stevekim.net

[Malachi Maloney]

That's exactly what I was saying, c.
_________________
l i q u i d w e r x

[Rinaldo]

I would say there is no way you can properly teach/learn "creativity" (or whatever word one wishes to call it) but you can discover/educe it.
it is possible to activly teach someone to draw in the mechanical sense. but there is no critical path for the other stuff.
saying you have to be born with it tho...is getting into the nature nurture debate IMHO. if ur saying it's genetic then ok, fair enuf, I couldn't disagree more, but that's a whole 'nother issue.

a lot of people would prolly say you can teach creativity tho.

I tend to go by:

"The Tao that can be told is not the eternal Tao.
The name that can be named is not the eternal Name.
Lao-Tzu (604 BC - 531 BC), Tao Te Ching

in relation to a lot of things poeple say you can teach. (I'm not a taoist tho, so someone will prolly have a fit at my use of this, eheh)


shut the fuck up and draw:P
_________________

Dailyscribble