Here'a a thought on that Roger, hypersensitivity might be what causes my blood pressure to rise in an instant, and yet you might read somewhere that people with emotive high blood pressure are said to be emotionally blind.
"Researchers reported that people with high blood pressure were less reactive when shown photographs and text passages meant to trigger emotions including fear, anger and happiness."
I think anyone can be sensitive. Not sure what hypersensitivity is. There will undoubtedly be a definition for it, that though is probably full of falsehoods.
Job categories do not determine that. Unless you are digging coal out of the ground, perhaps.
Think of Rosy Greer, 87, and his knitting.
PS just saw an ad close to the top of the headlines on Yahoo, the ad is against avocados. Toxic. It is amazing how much time is spent by mankind making up false medical or in this case psych information.
sen·si·tive | ˈsen(t)-sə-tiv , ˈsen(t)s-təv
Definition of sensitive (Entry 1 of 2)
1: SENSORY sense 2
2a: receptive to sense impressions
b: capable of being stimulated or excited by external agents (such as light, gravity, or contact)"
I'm convinced, whether we like it or not, as artists we are more (hyper) receptive and are, by internal forces, compelled to react
I think Robert Browning put it very succinctly
when he said that we are at our most naked
and vulnerable in our art: and all that 'soft
flesh', that deeply tender interior of our most
vulnerable selves - that it is all too much temp-
tation for some not to slash and hack at that
naked sensibility, to cause the maximum hurt
and damage in that unprotected area.
As a consequence, Robert Browning in being
so savaged, stopped with his poetry, his art
for over four years before he could find the
wherewithal to write again!
As Per Pearl S. Buck, the American novelist and recipient of the Pulitzer Prize and the Nobel Prize, captured what it means to be a highly sensitive person:
The truly creative mind in any field is no more than this: A human creature born abnormally, inhumanly sensitive. To him... a touch is a blow, a sound is a noise, a misfortune is a tragedy, a joy is an ecstasy, a friend is a lover, a lover is a god, and failure is death. Add to this cruelly delicate organism the overpowering necessity to create, create, create—so that without the creating of music or poetry or books or buildings or something of meaning, his very breath is cut off from him. He must create, must pour out creation. By some strange, unknown, inward urgency he is not really alive unless he is creating.
More sensitive than others? Would have no way of knowing or measuring that. I do know if a few days go by and I am not able to get into the studio I get grumpy. I also know that there is never a time, when I am awake, when I’m not on the lookout for ideas. I do believe that creativity is at the core of humanity and if that is connected to sensitivity then I would say that artist are not more sensitive but perhaps more open to allowing the creative, sensitive side to reveal itself.
Yes sir far more emotionally bare to the world sort of like power lines with the insulation peeled back. What you’re describing can be historically verified. The flamboyant artist mentality driven by emotion goes back millions of years even to ancient Egypt. Artists are considered to be more sensitive to the light if you will. But in modern terms we find in studies of manic behavior that some of the world’s most creative people are described as manically depressed or bi-polar. Both are terms usually ostracized in common society because of lacking understanding in the area. However their art is considered a gift and they are held in the highest esteem. Some of the art created is verging on euphoric and divine joy while the lows have created art that is remarkably uncomfortable for some persona to view because of the conflict depicted in its truth.
Jack the concept of the sensitive artist does date back a bit but since ancient Egypt dates only about 5,000 years ago and our species has not been around for millions of years that might be a slight exaggeration.
Rather a broad statement Yuri. I think the stereotype is that women are more sensitive but I honestly think it is more of an individual thing. You are probably right from the standpoint that it is more acceptable for women to express feelings, rather sad I might add. Perhaps that is the reason more homicides and other violent crimes are committed by men, I don’t know
I wonder why it is that humans have a tendency to want to pigeonhole everything from art styles to art movements to what is or is not art. I just never can place myself in anyone category or classification even if I try because I always prove it wrong or find an exception or I find that I change over time.
Humans are such capable and complex beings that I think we can be all things and yet be none in particular and I see no need to be classified, the second we accept broad classifications and believe them to the exclusion of something else it only serves to limit us, we become what we think we are.
"In the present research based on a community sample of more than 5000 participants, we tested the emotional sensitivity hypothesis, stating that women are more sensitive to perceive subtle, i.e. low intense or ambiguous, emotion cues.
In addition, we included a self-report emotional intelligence test in order to examine any discrepancy between self-perceptions and actual performance for both men and women.
We used a wide range of stimuli and models, displaying six different emotions at two different intensity levels. In order to better tap sensitivity for subtle emotion cues, we did not use a forced choice format, but rather intensity measures of different emotions.
We found no support for the emotional sensitivity account, as both genders rated the target emotions as similarly intense at both levels of stimulus intensity.
Men, however, more strongly perceived non-target emotions to be present than women.
In addition, we also found that the lower scores of men in self-reported EI [Emotional Intelligence] was not related to their actual perception of target emotions, but it was to the perception of non-target emotions."
Scrolling through rapidly . . . but I was about to say men are more "sensitive" than women . . . to criticism, that is. I know that in my experience, women are way more likely to consider constructive criticism than men. Men just dismiss the critique and say, "That's the way I want it".
Roger, the light just went on. I reread your original statement. Your are talking about insight, not emotional sensitivity. Not so big a can of worms. Gotcha.
I don't really care for the word hyper, it seems too extreme. I believe we have insight but not x-ray vision. Artists look at things and envision it as a work of art, where other people see pretty colors in a sunset. The non artist doesn't have to take as much time to look because they're not going to do anything with it, unlike the artist who wants to share that beauty with others and......make it his(her) own creation.
What I wonder is, why do people want painted portraits or landscapes rather than a photograph?
Roger, I won't try to speak for others. But, I think I am more sensitive than many people (and there are both pros and cons to that).
I don't mean I have mood swings (despite my name), or that I get offended easily. But, I noticed that since I am highly empathetic of others their feelings tend to rub off on me, so if they feel happy I feel happy, but if they are sad I am sad, almost as much as I would be if I was sharing their experiences with them instead of just observing their experiences ad a bystander. I also noticed that I get more excited and hyped up about little things more easily than most people I know.
I am highly observant and perceptive too. I often feel deep emotions from things I see and hear. So, I like to make art so others can feel what I am feeling when I made the image or what I feel when I see whatever I'm trying to depict in my art.
I assumed everyone's emotions were felt as deeply as mine. But, as I've gotten older and observed and talk to many people, I've realized that I am more emotional and empathetic than most people.
For instance, when someone is suffering it reminds me of a time I suffered, and I feel almost as bad as when I actually was suffering in the past. This makes it hard for me to forget that other person's suffering until it distracts me constantly, disturbs my sleep, and exhausts me until I attempt to action to try to stop their suffering. If I can't find any way to help them I'll feel frustrated, guilty, and hopeless. Then when mention to someone else that I need to figure out a way to help so-and-so since he is suffering they'll be like--"Huh? Why? What happened to him? Did I already hear about it? I don't remember."
Roger, I like paintings of landscapes better than pictures usually, because the picture shows us how everything in the scene really is, but a painting shows us only the aspects he wants to share from a landscape he saw, or he'll show a scene made completely from his imagination (so, it's a place inaccessible without his painting). A photo doesn't necessarily tell a story. But, a painting always tells a little story through the details the artist decides to add or leave out. I enjoy trying to read the story.
Not sure that the concept that a painting of a scene sells better than a photo but going with that concept, here is a theory. Hand made items are valued simply because they are closer to the human. They did not have to go through a mechanical filter, camera, computer to be produced. I personally feel that the more technology rises the more value hand made items will have.
As a "Non-Artist" I will tell you that my experience in speaking with artists (OK it's a generalization, and ALL present company is excluded from the generalization) is that they have a dulled sensitivity. Absolutely not a heightened sensitivity.
I have hypothesized that the artist, in the fugue state (I will admit that I learned that term from Breaking Bad) the artist has a connection to the muse, to the collective consciousness, to their work that is transcendent of the "Time/space" reality. But outside of that, there is ego and pride. Fear of harm coming to those impulses (for lack of a better term at this moment) creates a defense mechanism. This defensiveness could be regarded as hypersensitivity.
The same thing happens to us "Non Artists" we do our best, then our best is deemed to be "not good enough" by others and by ourselves. there are 80% of people who will find it not worth the effort to do their best going forward so as to protect themselves from that pain. 20% will move forward,
Of that 20% that moved forward, 80% will insist that the world is wrong. 20% will move forward.
80% Of those will achieve a level of comfort with their work and the reaction to it such that they feel they have found their niche and will never progress from that point.
20% will move forward.
The number of successful conversations that I have had with artists about the spiritual nature of their work has yet to approach the 20% of the 20% of the 20% of the artists I have known and spoken with.
By my math, I have to say that the idea that artists (in general) have hypersensitivity to anything other than their egos (which we ALL have) is a myth.
Chante, what you're describing is what's called being an empath. I'm one too. It's a blessing and a curse.
I bought the book, The Highly Sensitive Person, years ago to try and figure out how to control my hypersensitivity. What I learned was, I couldn't. The only remedy was to totally stay away from living beings, and you can't do that... not totally. Well I couldn't. I do keep to myself a lot though, to keep my sanity. I don't mind it at all, and have never been so calm. Being an empath, I absorb others' energy, and people are drawn to that too. You have to find a balance so you're not always depleted of your own energy, nor filled with others' troubled energy.
Uther, I'm pretty sure you know I don't believe in the numbers game. I think it's a crock of caca. Unless you speak to every artist on the planet, it is still just a generalization. Some artists are egotistical and are snobs, while others just enjoy creating, they like to share their work. No matter how good ones work is, there is always someone better. Artwork is like everything worth doing, it is a growing process. Ooops, sorry, I gotta go. Catcha later
Last September coming back from the Cape, my dad said to me, "how about taking a photo of that along the road? Would it sell"?
I said, "dad look around that hillside, see the guardrail on the road, the telephone wires? My competition at FAA got up to take his or her last shot at 2 AM. First they drove sixty miles out into the wilderness. That person hiked six miles off the road. S/he set up their camera for 5:16 sunrise."
He said, "okay, okay, I get it".
I might as well have added, if the light was not right, they planned the next attempt.
The point is Roger, it is NEVER an instant... and that you think it is is quite amazing to me.
Pushing the button is not all there is to it even when a photographer gets lucky and can get a capture in a few seconds which almost never happens. There is a whole more that goes into it before it ends up on FAA.
But let's not beat this to death...
However, I do what to mention, that I am showing with an artist in several galleries. She has three or four images that she paints over and over again, each one a tiny, tiny bit different. She says she can paint 4-5 and hour and I believed her. So, because she can crank they out that fast make it bad art?
I don't think time has a thing to do with it for photograpers or painters or sculptors for that matter.
I think the best artists are removed non-judgmental objective observers with a great sensitivity to materials they use and in a rare moment make an honest connection with other people. Hypersensitive implies a manic mind, I would just settle for people that are in any way a tiny bit sensitive. If you get around people that are genuinely hypersensitive, it's walking on egg shells and repressive / oppressive one's self expression. It's the same thing with a world class chef - a great sensitivity to materials they use that others don't have and never will have. People that are passionate about what they do combined with a great sensitivity to the human condition: produce great things! Art is the only part of culture whereby anyone can pronounce themselves an artist with no other qualification, then hack together some junk and call it art - it still does not make it true.
Kathy, currently the conceptualists are ruling the roost. Given time this will not be the case. Will there be useful important stuff from this movement? I suspect there will be. Will there be garbage and hype? Sure of that as well but that is just how it goes. All you can really do is make art and do the best you can. Personally as an elementary art teacher I enjoy the challenge of explaining stuff that appears nuts in a rational way, at least it keeps me busy.
I hear you about numbers. I disagree with your proposition. I agree that artists are like anyone else in that they are all different from everyone else. Just ask them, they'll tell you... Just like everyone else will. (sorry, got a little carried away by the muse there.[smiley emoticon goes here])
Thing about the numbers is that as a numerical abstract, absolutely, they shouldn't be used to classify human beings. But there is evidence that the whole place just follows numbers. Stories are repetitive, Someone just said "I'm so predictable..." that's a recognition of repetition of outcomes based upon the actions leading up to it.
Those are just numbers. Representing a large set of variables. "These 42 variables always result in this 1 outcome.
Of course this may well be why I don't have successful conversations about things such as the mechanism of the muse (there has to be a process and a plane upon which these "whatever it is that 'we' as artists are hypersensitive to," exist. If one is sensitive to it then it has to exist -or -one is clinically insane....not that there's anything wrong with that... or right...) Yeah, that could have something to do with it.
" Seeing and feeling more intensely and reacting to it, defines the Artist" -Roger
Roger, I personally attest that those three things you point out are integral in unleashing the creative passion,how exactly it all plays out or works I don't really know,but there is no doubt that intensity and reacting is going on at a turned up level, it's pretty difficult to weld with eyes closed so I know seeing is also happening.
There might be others things going on too that I know nothing about,much of what I called realms in the series of drip paintings I did came to light after the fact in the paintings of which I have no explanation for, only questions and amazement. We tinker in a wonderful and mysterious world when we set our minds on creating.
Artist have a tendency to think of themselves as special and their art greater than what it actually is. Even this attribute is prevalent among the none-artistic. For example, a cop or a firefighter may see themselves as special and relevant when in fact they are subject to the same pitfalls as everyone else.
Many artist also see art through an ananamorphic perspective. Many idolize objects (especially their own creations) distorting the reality of their own insignificance to an inflated relevance.
Drew your cop and firefightet example, is peepoor example. Sorry to say, it's not that they feel special it's that the job entails special skills and the risks of the job are much greater taken on a daily basis them most would face. :-)
"Drew your cop and firefightet example, is peepoor example. Sorry to say, it's not that they feel special it's that the job entails special skills and the risks of the job are much greater taken on a daily basis them most would face. :-)"
Of course this would be your response Mario for it is virtually impossible for you to ignore the group by which you have on many occasions identified yourself with. In fact, your response supports the point that many think of themselves as belonging to a special peer group. Artist are no different.
A nice distraction Ronal but irrelevant.
Roger's proposition suggests their is a proverbial genetic marker like the mark of Caine that distinguishes artist and makes them special; hence the term Hypersensitive. I simply challenge the notion.
I've been following this for a while and trying to make sense of it. Lots of tangents that seem to be to be irrelevant. It seems to me that we are all talking about slightly different things.
Roger said Seeing and feeling more intensely and reacting to it,
I don't see that as hypersensitivity. In other words I think hypersensitivity is the wrong word. Hyper awareness perhaps. An ability to see what others don't readily see, moreover to feel what others don't readily feel. But it's not hypersensitivity.
Hypersensitivity is excessive emotional reactions. Of the irrational kind. Over achievers and people with low self esteem seem to be the ones who are hypersensitive. The indicators of hypersensitivity aren't limited to artists, but pretty much across the board. I've worked with hypersensitive people and none that I recall had any artistic ability or tendency.
Drew, I suggest you are just having fun. Seriously I do agree with you that being an artist has little to do with genetics but I do think some are more prone to heading in an artistic direction than others. Perhaps environment , who knows? I don’t think just anyone can be a Picasso just because they want it and work hard. Sort of like being a Michael Jordan. Not in the cards for just anyone.
What duh ya mean? ... You calling me names, 'cuz I'm an artist?!
How dare you imply that I'm hypersensitive?! I've never been so insulted in my life !!
You should be banned from this site for such insulting insinuations !
I mean, seriously, what gives YOU the right to label me? ... to marginalize me with your toxic male, stereotypes!!!! ... to fabricate generalized narratives that can be weaponized by power elites to control me and abuse me with their imperialistic legal structures !!!!!!!!!!!!
I think (or at least I refer to it as such) that we all tend to see the same things, but the difference is that the artist stops and renders his (her) perception while the rest of them see it and say "huh?" and then move on.
I think this is why some artists are successful and others not so much. Because some artists see what the "they" see and capture it so that people who saw it say "Yeah, that's what I saw, it feels familiar" whereas other artists see it differently or render it differently such that the "they" don't relate to the perception.
This could be why "Street Photography" appeals to buyers, because they have been in a similar situation and the perception is a memory thing. (just as an example)
says the guy who drives past solstice lights and wants to stop to capture them...but... I'm not an artist.
Work that initially is unfamiliar but eventually becomes relatable
That's what I call ART
I remember B.V (before vultures) when I would point out to people who regularly went in and out of the Seagram Building in New York, how the window in the lobby, perfectly framed the building across the street , The New York Racquet and Tennis Club, " I never noticed that", was the common response.... I firmly believe, deep down they felt that....And that was one reason why the Seagram Building so different than all the surrounding buildings was such a comfortable neighbor...... And that is why Mies van der Rohe was not just an architect but an artist
Of course there are. We are human, we are artists, we have human DNA.
My DNA strains were into weaving, tailoring, and art........music as well......
Ironically, my oldest nephew was entranced as an 1.5 year old toddler with trains. His preschool teachers said he was the only child putting things together. This was happening because to run the trains, he had to put the tracks together. Meanwhile my grandfather the tailor, his brothers and father worked on the railroad before working as tailors.
The analytics, my parents' generation going to college, because of the systematic workings of their parents in tailoring?
But ya know there are plenty of other talented human beings based on DNA working hard as professionals in other fields.
This is the third time I have written this. Do you know if you write something on this page and then leave the page and come back what you wrote down will have been deleted. I didn't know until now. Or maybe it's the amount of time passed. Not sure. I'm very new at this. Maybe Abbie knows.
Jack, I do not have at this time a crock of caca for viewing. Hahahaha.... I might have to consider painting one, and if I do it will probably be an abstract.
I don't think artists are hyper or over anything. What an artist sees or senses is a necessity. How else are you going to create something if you don't spend some time with it? I think artists see things and want to make it into their own creation.
As for the artists who think they're better than others, I think that's their personality, and you can find that in all walks of life. I've said that before..
Another thought just came to mind. Maybe the reason artists got such a bad reputation for being moody, or sensitive might have something to do with the paints and artistic supplies the Masters used way back when were toxic. Also, bad lighting, lack of sleep. Some of the artists were poor which means they didn't eat very well, all these things could contribute to an attitude problem. Just a thought.
Tara, you have a total of 5 replies in this thread. No one (except admin, or yourself within 24 hours of posting) can remove your reply. If there are a lot of replies, you will see the Big Skip in the middle of the thread... click there and you can view all the replies in a long thread. The Big Skip just condenses a very long thread.
Yes. I am familiar with the Geico Gecko through the ancient art of mass media advertising.
I hold that in order for an image (one, two or three dimensional) to resonate there has to be some level of simpatico before the sight of it. It might not be Vultures in particular... I'm not going to tell you about your customers...
To teach anything we have to take the student from the known to the unknown. We have to have a place that the new knowledge can connect to. Then come from.
Mechanisms of the self aren't custom made to the situation. The mechanisms are essentially the operating system, they do the same thing over and over, problem solving. As such we can assume that the process of learning from art follows the same pattern. Therefore there is something in the art that finds that place to connect. and then understanding can grow from there.
Hi Joy, thanks for responding. I wasn't finished with what I was writing when I left the page then came back and it was gone. Oh well, doesn't matter, I won't do that again.
Just to let you all know I am going on hiatus from FAA until Jan 26th. The only reason I am letting you know is, I don't want you to think I am rude or angry for not responding if you happen to write something to me. It's been a pleasure and fun communicating with you all. I'll get back to you in 11 days. The Lord willing and the creek don't rise. Tara
Oh P.S. Roger, that's a great story. It reminds of the deer droppings jewelry they used to sell to tourists at Shasta Dam back in the late 60's early 70's.
I was doing a street Art fair....This fine, fine young lady,....decked out in the latest high fashion...with a demeanor indicative of very proper upbringing, came walking by.
She first goes past my display...The turns around and comes back.....with a quizzical look.
I'm sure she was asking herself, "Why is this stuff at an art show??" adding "And why am I staring at it??
"VULTURES??? Who would want VULTURES??, and it's SHELL CRAFT..How Low can you go??? and it's certainly NOT museum quality"
" And here I am standing, staring at this particular rather elaborate piece.................I GOT TO HAVE IT!!!!" she continues, under her breath
"BUT WAIT!!!....What are my friends going to think,.........You Paid How Much For THAT !!!, they going to torment me with!!!"
"I'll guess I'll buy this smaller, less expensive piece"
As she approaches with the small sculpture in hand, a "Biker" comes roaring into the booth...A leather coated, bare chested, tatood ,300 pound Biker
"MAN!! THIS GREAT SH*T" he bellows....Grabs that elaborate piece.....Plunks down the cash......And stomps away
The look on the lovely young lady, was priceless, as she takes out her credit card.
I can close it for you if you wish, Robert.......
*Smiles innocently* ... Abbie
Tarra F, ... You can check in, but you can never leave, without being erased. In the past, I have spent many minutes composing what I thought was an intelligent, detailed, thoughtful post, only to leave momentarily to check a fact and return to a blank. Probably some of my best comments have disappeared this way.
That bio is the short version. Somewhere, if you scroll down near the bottom of a page, you'll see the full version, with that as the last paragraph. This was my first ever bio for Fine Art America, and it has received several compliments. I'm honored that yours is among those now.
I'm not sure if that comes in affirmation of what I have said or if it is presented as refutation.
I would say that it is affirmation. I don't know what darkness brought the princess and the street tuff together in their curiosity, although it is the stuff of love stories from the earliest yearnings of a common lad for the leg of "Fair Maiden" as she rode past on her trusted gelding.
The point being that there needs to be that connection to her "unknown known zone." she found herself drawn, against her better judgment, to the imagery of your art.
At this point I don't really recall what we were discussing... I guess I can twist it around to her "hypersensitivity" and we can talk for a second about the relativistic quality based upon quantity of stimuli.
Which is to say that one can be both opaque and hypersensitive to the same thing at the same time. If the connection is small to start with, it can be easy to ignore the impulse to scratch the itch. But then when faced with a strong impulse it can be seen as a "Hyper sensitivity" one which breaks through the barrier of indifference to become a priority.
The larger the base to which the stimuli can connect the lower the absolute sensitivity needs to be to alter one's behavior. As such, the artist needn't be "Hypersensitive" it's just that the frame of reference (the connection point) is just "wider" and takes less "energy" for it to become a priority.
There is a certain amount of Hammer involved there (The old saying in the sales business being "When the only tool you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a nail." which does help explain how artists can connect to "the muse" while working and have no apparent connection in other aspects of their lives.