JGBE Virtual Jam (Round 77) - Close Your Eyes

[ragman1]

You criticize yourself and do not encourage listening - that's how I understood it.
For what purpose are you publishing it?
Slow stuff can also be played beautifully.

I think any artist should be self-critical, don't you? We should never be satisfied.

I publish it because it's there, because I've done it, because it has a platform here. I used to just post for myself and share with friends but, to be honest, here is better.

Yes, slow stuff can certainly be played beautifully.

[kris]

I don't know any arists who would criticize their work, as if they did, they would have big problems selling their works of art.
Not satisfaction and the self-criticism of the recording are two different things.

[ragman1]

The word artist here means anyone who makes a form of expression, could be painting, sculpture, drama, music, anything.

The word criticize can have two meanings. It can just mean petty fault-finding but, applied to art, it can simply mean evaluation and appraisal.

I think the two are frequently confused. If an artistic work is criticized by someone who understands the art then it may involve praise. But it could also mean that any short-comings are pointed out. Which, naturally, will upset a non-critical artist. But, of course, if that artist was self-critical in the right sense, he would already be aware of the short-comings of his work.

Any professional musician, film-maker, actor, artist, etc, who puts their work into the public domain knows they will receive attention by the critics. And the critics may say it's wonderful... or they may not.

So, by an artist being self-critical, I meant they should have no illusions about their work. They should be able to view it clearly and objectively. It has nothing to do with personal self-condemnation or self-doubt (which they may suffer from anyway - Wes Montgomery did quite a lot) but be able to see its good points and bad points for themselves. Which can be difficult, I agree.

So actually the two go together. Not being satisfied is a good thing, a creative thing. But it also integrally implies self-criticism, not of the personal self but of the work. And unfortunately it is a bit of a minefield.

This is quite good, I think.

Why Artists are Never Happy With Their Work | by Charlie Ellis | Medium

[kris]

That's nothing new to me.
If you feel like an "artist" ... it's ok.
I would be careful though.As a rule, artists have artistic achievements.
It's something like that: I recorded a new album but do not buy it because I play it poorly-it was not my day ...
Unless it's some kind of intellectual game here on the forum...?

[ragman1]

When I said artist I wasn't trying to describe myself! Noodler might be better

It's something like that: I recorded a new album but do not buy it because I play it poorly-it was not my day ...

Absolutely, they would be stupid to say that publicly if they were trying to sell it.

No, it's not an intellectual game, it's a serious issue, especially here. You know how the wrong word can cause people to go into meltdown. That's why I'm making a point of it.