100 note cards

So I have been pondering the definition of bad art for a while today. I was sitting in David's car this afternoon while he was making a quick stop at the laundry facility near his apartment, and it hit me that bad art is in some way correlated to the definition of good art. [Besides it being just as vague and ambiguous.] I think that the quality of art can be determined by looking past the surface and going deeper. In other words, I think that good and bad art can be deciphered by understanding the intention and mind set of the artist. To me, good art expresses something and is created intentionally to express something. I am sure that happy accidents happen every now and then when the artist absent mindedly creates something that happens to impact the viewer... but as part of the bigger picture, I feel that artists who create a piece of work for a reason and who actively embrace the process are successful. Maybe the outcome is not as strong or pleasing as it could have been, but the intention is there, and the artist has a reason for making art. If we judged art in terms of technicality and precision, then we would all fall short and would be creators of nothing other than bad art. Therefore, it is much more than perfection. It is human intention evident in artistic passion and a concrete outcome.

Bad art, on the other hand, must be the opposite of what I feel good art represents. It must be created without intention and must be absent mindedly put together. I think that bad art does nothing for the artist and is most likely to do nothing for the viewer as well. Meaningless, inconsistent, without passion and inspiration behind it.

So, based on this idea, I have been creating little pictures, pictures that speak nothing to me and are derived from a rather boring subconscious.