that's what i thought
if the purpose of art is to stimulate the mind, then something just happened that was art, for my mind is stimulated. but if it was not the artist's intention to produce that image, but the image was a by-product of another, greater creation, then should we credit the artist for the piece? furthermore, should this credit now be bestowed upon whoever designed that tripod logo? the logo on its own was not what caused the stimulation. etc.
(god i can type fast when i'm bulshitting)
( ,
Sat 8 Jun 2002, 17:00,
archived)
(god i can type fast when i'm bulshitting)