I agree with your assertion that people feed themselves excuses for not creating, e.g., I can be an artist when a or b or c transpires.
However, at the same time, I think we should recognize that it ain't exactly easy to produce Art. You summed it up by mentioning Michaelangelo. We can't press a button and produce stuff that even begins to possess a speck of the utter divinity that seems to glow from his work product.
So I have asked another question: Do certain mental traits or drives or needs inspire Art.
Nietzsche had an answer in the "Birth of Tragedy," and I have applied his answer to some Rock N roll Music
This is what, according to Nietzsche, fueled the artistic process:
The artist creates in his work that which eludes him in real life, e.g., an artist may be rigid and uneasy in expressing love and emotion so his paintings or poems are infused with love and emotion.
I applied this to John Lennon. Lennon was, by most accounts, often quite a son of a bitch. Insofar as sexuality was concerned, he was a bit of a cave man, seeing women as bitches and gay men as fags. He was very distant to Julian. Arguably, he was unfair to Paul. And so his love and sensitivity was center stage in his music and his voice.
Every time I write a new song I ask Deb, "Do you think it will get me laid?" Which, of course, is the ultimate reason to create art.... right?
Her response, "Doubtful, but scrubbing the floors might."
And so it goes.
In truth, Deb and I discuss creativity and, more importantly, execution on that creativity - ie: the creation of art. I'm unsure what mental traits drive someone to create art. I know, for me, it more or less is something I've always done. Even as a small child.
And, much of the time, I know I'm good at it. Even if I am simultaneously filled with self-doubt. I believe it was Stephen King who said something like, "A writer believes they have something to say but are surprised as hell when anyone read it." That statement may encapsulate as much about the artists as anything.
I agree with your assertion that people feed themselves excuses for not creating, e.g., I can be an artist when a or b or c transpires.
However, at the same time, I think we should recognize that it ain't exactly easy to produce Art. You summed it up by mentioning Michaelangelo. We can't press a button and produce stuff that even begins to possess a speck of the utter divinity that seems to glow from his work product.
So I have asked another question: Do certain mental traits or drives or needs inspire Art.
Nietzsche had an answer in the "Birth of Tragedy," and I have applied his answer to some Rock N roll Music
This is what, according to Nietzsche, fueled the artistic process:
The artist creates in his work that which eludes him in real life, e.g., an artist may be rigid and uneasy in expressing love and emotion so his paintings or poems are infused with love and emotion.
I applied this to John Lennon. Lennon was, by most accounts, often quite a son of a bitch. Insofar as sexuality was concerned, he was a bit of a cave man, seeing women as bitches and gay men as fags. He was very distant to Julian. Arguably, he was unfair to Paul. And so his love and sensitivity was center stage in his music and his voice.
Every time I write a new song I ask Deb, "Do you think it will get me laid?" Which, of course, is the ultimate reason to create art.... right?
Her response, "Doubtful, but scrubbing the floors might."
And so it goes.
In truth, Deb and I discuss creativity and, more importantly, execution on that creativity - ie: the creation of art. I'm unsure what mental traits drive someone to create art. I know, for me, it more or less is something I've always done. Even as a small child.
And, much of the time, I know I'm good at it. Even if I am simultaneously filled with self-doubt. I believe it was Stephen King who said something like, "A writer believes they have something to say but are surprised as hell when anyone read it." That statement may encapsulate as much about the artists as anything.