Skip to content | Skip to navigation
Feb 11, 2003 08:19 # 8727
There aren't many people who consider programming an art form. Then again, there aren't many people who are programmers. But even the vast majority of programmers wouldn't consider their work art. I guess there are two types of programmers. There are the hired programmers that are in it for the money, and then there are the artists who do it for the love of creation. Like the difference between, say, How to Lose a Guy in 10 Days and American Beauty. Or the difference between Brittany Spears and The Pixies. One has passion and the other doesn't.
I suppose programming as an art form is misunderstood because people don't really understand what programmers do anyways. It's easy to see what a painter or a musician does, but people are afraid of computers. Consider the people who used to make games for the Atari. They would write the story, do the visuals, create the music, then represent it all in the beautiful language of logic.
I guess I would define art as something that someone has created that they feel passionate about and have an intimate connection with.
Feb 11, 2003 14:15 # 8735
hm.. finally somebody who is seeing it the same way as i do :)
I've always said (and still saying): For becoming a good coder, you have to be creative. No creativity, no good coder.
A coder is creating something, if not new then at least he is forming materia out of light (electrons and positrons). so he somewhat is God, doing the art of creation.
I've always been creative. Not only, that I posess some very high developed talents in so-called Arts (painting, drawing, design, etc.), but I also dont lack writing abilities. and finally, i do have unused abilities in the musical area...
... but i always come back to programming. :)
guess why? ;)
Metal has no laws. Metal is the law.
This post was edited by oxygenius on Feb 11, 2003.
Feb 24, 2003 04:49 # 9014
Feb 24, 2003 07:09 # 9015
I needed to make an example of someone... she's an easy target. She's a commercialized money machine, what can I say? If she has a passion for singing, then I just have trouble seeing it through the layers of spandex and over produced electronic music.
Maybe if she wrote her own songs, or played her own music, or wasn't a complete tool, I would feel differently.
Check out the list of album credits here:
91 people, other than Spears herself. Vocals aren't even credited to her.
BUT let's not derail the topic here.
Feb 24, 2003 16:22 # 9031
I played trumpet, mostly jazz, for a while and I loved it. I had a passion for it, but I never played a song I wrote myself. I've never even writtena song.
"I just have trouble seeing it through the ... over produced electronic music."
So the production level of a song determines its worth? I guess it's only good if it's under produced because it shows your not in it for the fame and money?
I simply find it fascinating that people feel a need to bash people like Britany Spears. If you don't like it then ignore it, but it's extremely arrogant to assume it's worthless simply because you don't like it. Especially something as subjective as music.
Feb 24, 2003 20:46 # 9036
Hah! But I never said I didn't like it!
Her music is manufactured by the corporate machine. There are millions of people who could fill Spears' shoes. She exhibits no special abilities. She's not in the same league as the creative geniuses of the Pixies and other such bands.
She can go ahead an feel passionate about being a money making tool for the billion dollar music industry, but none of that is reflected in her product.
I'm NOT bashing Brittany Spears. I don't feel the need to do so. I'm using her as an example, and she was the perfect choice.
Jul 11, 2003 19:55 # 13863
Her voice is completely synthesized... it's not even her real singing voice...In person without synthesizers she sounds like a dying cat. Her range is very short, and many professional vocalists that have any talent and tonal quality do tend to point out the lack of vocal quality she shows.
Hehehe... it's so funny that most people who seem to make themselves out as an authority on a subject tend to have a lack of knowledge on the subject they are defending.