popular

  I've always been a little confused  by something. To be new and original is lauded as a great thing. What's confusing is that in order to be new and original you have to have training. Think about it. Want to be an artist, you have to go to art school, want to be a writer, take journalism classes. If you don't have that training and you submit your work it will be picked apart as being unprofessional. It won't be called new, original or inventive, it will be rejected. Well at least most of the time it will be. In todays world we do have the possibility of going viral. Going viral, so called because it is like a virus, you get it whether you want to or not, is a game changer. Well, you may not really get it, but it is the popular thing, so you say you like it. That's what happened with that abstract, impressionist art stuff in my opinion. Some rich and influential people said it was wonderful and just like that, it's a thing. Andy Warhol was a genius. He painted a Campbell soup can and sold that for millions. I believe he laughed his way all the way to the bank. Me, I 'm just confused. I'm a very poor artist, by that I mean I can't paint, draw, or do pencil sketches of anything. But I know several people that are quite capable of painting a Campbell soup can. And as far as Starry night goes, the man was in a mental hospital when he painted that! But, yeah, okay if you say so.

 I do understand a little of this though. It is all about establishing a standard. In order to judge something we have to compare it to something else, perceived to be the standard. Then a standard having been established we measure the other products against that. It is really all about defining the standard. That's what all that jibber jabber is about from the "experts." They are so intellectual they can explain reality even when it isn't real. They can talk to me all day long but Jackson Pollock did little more than throw paint around on a canvas, give it a name and a huge price tag. Yes, I know, I'm uneducated and don't appreciate fine art. Yeah, if you say so. 

 I do have a theory though. If just one of your creations, whatever it may be, is accepted, perceived as great, for the most part whatever you do after that will be too. That theory falls apart with the one hit wonders in the fifties and sixties but that's another discussion. Hey Stephen King has made a career out of basically writing the same story over and over. I know, I've read a good number of them, also the reason I stopped reading them. Louis L'amour did the same thing with his western novels and I enjoyed reading all of them. That was because there is no thought required, just a simple story without a pretense of being anything else. In both of those cases the standard being the book before the newest release. Write the same story and you will remain popular. Anyway, it's just a theory. I do think that should just one of my blogs go viral I would then become "famous." I would have followers and all that. It may even be said I was insightful, entertaining and informed. My writing may be described as folksy and undisciplined. And all that would be said to create a new perception. It wouldn't change the reality however. I'm just an old guy with a keyboard that likes to write stuff. I do think that if Rap is going to be considered music, I have a shot at fame. After all it is all a matter of judgement isn't it? What is judgement based upon? A standard. Today we are told there is no standard, therefore we shouldn't judge. But if we don't judge how can we determine reality from fantasy? 

 Popularity is a strange thing. Here one minute, gone the next. It is constantly redefined. Who really determines what is popular? I've always wondered about that. Just who thought Disco was a good thing? And who convinced some guys to walk around with their pants sagging? How can that be popular? And why do so many seek popularity when popularity can't really be defined. That's some shaky ground to build on. It's all very confusing. Some establish popularity that never changes, think Elvis, while others are a flash in the pan. 

 What does all of this have to do with anything? I don't know, I'm just writing down my thoughts. They say everyone gets fifteen minutes of fame. I'd say I've had mine, although only for a few minutes at any one time. Yes it was Andy Warhol that said, " in the future everyone will be world famous for fifteen minutes." He's not too far from wrong. That was in 1968. The world has changed since then. Would he have had the success he enjoyed then in todays world? Maybe, now there is an artist whose work shreds itself, very amusing, genius. Some guy named Banksy pulled that stunt. Someone had paid 1.4 million for that painting. Don't know about that person but I sure would feel stupid! I'm guessing that person never actually paid the money, I sure wouldn't. But the world said what a genius Banksy is. Yeah, okay. I can honestly say I have no idea what kind of painting Banksy does, haven't seen a single one.