HofmaimaierJan 20

Rage

https://feddit.org/post/24610923

Show threadLOGICđź’Ł

I’m reminded of this possibly apocryphal story about Picasso:

[A] woman who approached Picasso in a restaurant, asked him to scribble something on a napkin, and said she would be happy to pay whatever he felt it was worth. Picasso complied and then said, “That will be $10,000.”

“But you did that in thirty seconds,” the astonished woman replied.

“No,” Picasso said. “It has taken me forty years to do that.”

To me, this story is about the paradox of mastering a craft. If a person has spent decades mastering an art or a craft, then when an amateur sees them working, it looks like it’s trivial. The amateur thinks, “Anybody could do that. I could do that, no problem. It’s easy.” Of course, it only looks easy because it’s the master doing it.

Dialogue Origin: “But You Did That in Thirty Seconds.” “No, It Has Taken Me Forty Years To Do That.” – Quote Investigator®

Jan 20 at 4:37pmWeb
Show threadstoyJan 22

Nah, that story is about fame, the story about mastering a craft is usually similar to this:

“A man takes his car to a mechanic, he explains that it makes a terrible rattle, and he can’t figure it out.

The mechanic opens the bonnet, and tells the man to start the engine, the man does and the mechanic hears the rattle, and without a word, takes out a screwdriver, and quickly tightens a loose screw.

The mechanic tells the man, that will be $250 please.

The man tells the mechanic that he is not paying $250 to just have a screw tightened.

The mechanic, agrees and shows the man a bill with a breakdown of costs:

$249 - knowing which screw to tighten.
$1 - physical labour

The man pays.”

To me, looking at the art world, it seems like in most modern art, the art is secondary to how well the artist manages to talk about it.