DiscussWorldIssues - Socio-Economic Religion and Political Uncensored Debate - View Single Post

**oronozopiy** · 02-24-2009, 06:07 AM

The artist's consciousness is only incidental.

(What is consciousness anyway?) That's the equivalence I'm drawing between the unconscious layers in the creative process of bad films and good films

I largely disagree with the claim that his consciousness is incidental.
I agree that sometimes things happen over and above the 'control' the creator claims to possess. But what draws us again to the artists works, what makes us expect his future works, what makes us seek unvisited past treasures all these are largely from what he consciously does. Don't you think so ?

How can I be so sure this how he intended I receive the works ? Well I can never be. In the context of mainstream average films, I can claim with some degree of arrogance, that the intention of the artist is guessable.

The multilayered lost in translation of a bad filmmaker is of lesser interest isn't it. I am not so convinced of the equivalence but I will wriggle out of that because I have already declared I am not gunning for consistency here.

Are his films consciously chauvinist? (Let's just say I tell him that they are. What would be his reaction?) Probably not. Do I care? Hell, no. Some films just don't cut it for whatever reasons. Why? Is it because the filmmaker wants it to be so? No. Surely, Cheran wants his films to be sensitive? But to the viewer (that is, me), it makes no difference.

His noble intention is not argument in itself. We judge the film regardless of that. Now let me tread the thin ice of judgement and go to an
oversimplified question.

Conceded that a filmmaker can (and will) be worse than he intends to be. Similarly he can better (though less likely) be better than he intends to be.

Good/Bad - subjective, beholder's evaluation of course.

But the question is whether I am applauding for the man who created it or a lucky coincidence he was a part of.

I am guessing your question is: "why do you care ?" Right ?
Hmm....kinda my question too. Perhaps credit to the artist implies possibility of such quality work from him to come. (Doesn't work for dead creators visited now).

02-24-2009, 06:07 AM	#8
oronozopiy Join Date Nov 2005 Posts 367 Senior Member	The artist's consciousness is only incidental. (What is consciousness anyway?) That's the equivalence I'm drawing between the unconscious layers in the creative process of bad films and good films I largely disagree with the claim that his consciousness is incidental. I agree that sometimes things happen over and above the 'control' the creator claims to possess. But what draws us again to the artists works, what makes us expect his future works, what makes us seek unvisited past treasures all these are largely from what he consciously does. Don't you think so ? How can I be so sure this how he intended I receive the works ? Well I can never be. In the context of mainstream average films, I can claim with some degree of arrogance, that the intention of the artist is guessable. The multilayered lost in translation of a bad filmmaker is of lesser interest isn't it. I am not so convinced of the equivalence but I will wriggle out of that because I have already declared I am not gunning for consistency here. Are his films consciously chauvinist? (Let's just say I tell him that they are. What would be his reaction?) Probably not. Do I care? Hell, no. Some films just don't cut it for whatever reasons. Why? Is it because the filmmaker wants it to be so? No. Surely, Cheran wants his films to be sensitive? But to the viewer (that is, me), it makes no difference. His noble intention is not argument in itself. We judge the film regardless of that. Now let me tread the thin ice of judgement and go to an oversimplified question. Conceded that a filmmaker can (and will) be worse than he intends to be. Similarly he can better (though less likely) be better than he intends to be. Good/Bad - subjective, beholder's evaluation of course. But the question is whether I am applauding for the man who created it or a lucky coincidence he was a part of. I am guessing your question is: "why do you care ?" Right ? Hmm....kinda my question too. Perhaps credit to the artist implies possibility of such quality work from him to come. (Doesn't work for dead creators visited now).
	Quote