I just woke up. From class.
It's not my fault, really. Honest. It was just the cold. And the fact that both Euler and Cauchy didn't make their differential equations interesting enough. Maybe they should have given it the hollywood treatment. You know, the way some sleazy producer hires a half-baked director to cast a dolled up actor to sleep with a silicon actress to pretend that all of them are actually doing justice to an important theme to win a fake award awarded through dubious means by a dubious panel to have a show call the oscars to have us all watch to make all that money and all in the name of art.
Wait I need to catch my breath.
It's not that I dont enjoy Hollywood ( or Bollywood or Kollywood for that matter ). They should just stop pretending that they're serious about making art. Leave art to the artist. Be honest with the fact that all you're interested in is the money. We don't mind. We paid to watch Tom Cruise do Nicole in Eyes Wide Shut, we'll pay to watch Keanu do Angelina Jolie. We're the masses, we demand to be entertained. Shoot something, kill something, do someone, we got time. Sing , dance, cry, fight, magic away a few hours of our lives.
Art is born when the artist purifies himself of the need to please his audience ( or their wallets ). It comes from the pure expression, the uninhibited expression of himself. Think of it as trying to walk through a crowd while being paranoid and self concsious about the way you look and who's looking at you. You'll look weird.
So is King Kong art? It's got some pretty interesting themes. Its pretty to look at. It's entertaining. Can both exist in one expression and can that expression be called art?
Are Euler and Cauchy's mathematical expressions of the changes we see happening around us ( say a raindrop trickling off a leaf, distance changing with time ) a form of art?
Geez, I dunno. I'm going back to sleep.