This week’s artist of the week made me more interested about my own major. From the class discussion I saw how a lot of classmates thought Avatars were part of art, and in reverse some thought they have no place in art category. In my opinion the avatars themselves could not be part of art, however the people that make those avatars could be called artists. Going back to our artists of the week, Vanessa Blaylock should not be called an artist. She basically uses the created avatars that are provided for her. In reverse the person who made the avatar and allowed her to be that avatar is an artist in my view.
The image I posted made me think about the characteristics of this lady. As we look at the image, the setting has volcano, river, tires and Turkey flag. Nothing in this image have similarities so I thought she doesn’t care about anything unless the avatar itself. Looking at the avatar, I see many detailed things in this image. To be honest I feel like Vanessa Blaylock is kind of weirdoo.
One thing that also caught my attention in this week’s artist was how our fellow classmates talked about the uses of avatars. In a few of my comments I mentioned how avatars give hope to children that have disability. Some people believe the whole process of making avatars and using avatars is stupid and should not be in art category. I completely disagree with this because in my perspective art has a different meaning. I believe if someone has the ability to inspire and motivate ill kids, they are definitely great artists. Majority of people view artists as only painters and drawers, this is a wrong thought process because anything that is made by a human could patiently be a part of art in my opinion.