[bubblegumcrisis]

"I was an art major and switched to CompSci purely for the money." Translation: Not an artist.

I worked for 30 years as a pianist. The number of programmers who have told me they too are a musician... No- you aren't. And you never were. That's the thing, if you were a musician, you would be playing music. That would be your job.

I mean as a hobbyist, yes, sure, enjoy splashing paint and calling it art, but spending the tens of thousands of hours to learn what music actually is, no, no, no. You aren't. Would you call yourself an architect if you can draw a picture of a building? No, you aren't.

No artist wants to "create things which were beyond their capabilities" with an AI, they want to develop their capabilities to create things beyond who they are now. Art is about discovering the world, yourself, the strange magic of an ethereal plane, some how reached through vibrations.

I don't know. Reading programmers talk about art, as if they are not dilettantes, is always depressing for me.

[qbit42]

I agree with some of your characterizations here, but I don’t think it is fair to say that if you are not currently a professional artist, you were never a true artist. People get unlucky, have families to support, etc

[bubblegumcrisis]

Sure, if you devote yourself to art, you commit, and I'm not talking some insulated school environment, to improve and struggle, and then you burn out. Yes, this is a well known path for an artist. They failed, but they are still an artist. They are a failed artist, and this is actually a proud title to wear.

Someone who decides, "I'll be a programmer for money," was never an artist. Someone who studies music in college and does admin for some company is not a "musician" and never was. It is the journey in art that makes the artist, not playing a piece.

Unfortunately art is just like that. The amount of time required in devotion to the skill is truly staggering and humbling. And then, it's never enough.

I don't know.

It is possible to make this commitment while working in some unrelated field, but it takes tremendous will-power. Charles Ives is an example I suppose.

[xgulfie]

This is borderline satirical. Being an artist doesn't require dedicating your entire life to it, that is not real, reasonable, or widely held

[Jtarii]

This might be the most pretentious waffle I have ever read lmfao.

You write like the critic from Ratatouille.

[queenkjuul]

So Vivian Meier was not a photographer? The local bands that work day jobs aren't musicians?

Nonsense, frankly. Being an artist is not dependent on monetizing your talent.

There are artists and musicians and photographers, and there are professional musicians and artists and photographers.

What is someone who writes and performs music every day their whole life but bartends to pay their rent, to you? They're not a musician but someone that makes ukulele tracks for corporate training videos is, because the latter does it professionally?

[bubblegumcrisis]

If you are a computer programmer who meets up with your buddies to play every once in a while, no you aren't an artist.

If you are in a band, and you are playing all the time, obviously you are an artist. The job is facilitating you playing. The playing is the focus.

Someone who decides in college, or directly after college, "you know what, I'm just gonna be a programmer." Then touches the piano every once in a while, or plays with his friends every once in a while. I don't call that an artist.

There are so many of these people. They aren't artists. Sorry. Are the smart, probably, are they talented, probably, are they committed, yes to programming.

[queenkjuul]

>you are in a band, and you are playing all the time, obviously you are an artist.

Well, no, it's very much not obvious, you literally just said "you're not a musician, if you were, it'd be your job" but now it doesn't have to be your job, as long as your job isn't programming?