I have a question that I think is appropriate for this board.

The internet? Nobody goes anywhere now, just online.

Berlin

>>1152079
Even if one could live in and off the internet, I don't think it would inspire any great work. Art is inspired by the beautiful as it is conceived and made manifest by man; the internet makes the beautiful accessible, but is not in itself beautiful.

>>1152080
Can you say more about this? What about Berlin attracts artists?

File: that fucking fawlty.png (216KB, 565x600px) Image search: [Google]

216KB, 565x600px

>>1152077
>individuated by innumerable artists.

Why don't you talk properly?

>>1152077

I'm not sure whether or where anything like how you imagine Paris or London existed for artists exists today. I'm not sure it ever existed at all, but that's another story.

But the world is full of small cities with lively art scenes where a starving artist can create, and semi-starve, in peace, surrounded by others doing interesting and stimulating work. Norfolk, VA, (of all places) seems to be one, Asheville, NC, another. If there are at least two within a days drive of my home, there are likely hundreds around the world.

I've also seen signs of interesting artistic enclaves in several cities in South America, but I am not sure if the Scene there rises to what you are looking for or not. Notably, to my eye, as someone passing by such stuff rather than delving into it, Bogota seemed to have a lot going on.

>>1152089
Thanks for your input. Judging by those cities close to you, I think we live relatively close to each other and although I have not been to Asheville, I am familiar with Norfolk and I hesitate to even consider what it has to be remotely a semblance of those artistic hubs of old. I found Richmond, VA to offer more than Norfolk but that too was minimal.

I noticed the same as you did when I was in South America and although some of the cities I saw could be considered as suitable for an artistic lifestyle, they lacked the essential diversity that made London and Paris so rich.

None of this is to discredit what you say: I agree entirely that on a smaller scale, communities exist where the artist might be comfortable, however I am wondering if there exists a place where he may thrive.

>>1152077
with the internet, you don't need to go anywhere to be exposed to art or get your own art some exposure

>>1152108
Read up on Asheville, dude. Here is an old article:
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/05/travel/05asheville-headsup.html?_r=0

>>1152108
My interest in Norfolk was in the theater scene mostly which, for a small city, is pretty vibrant. Through theater folk, I got to know (in passing) some guys doing some neat work in glass, sculpture, p[painting and music.

For a cursory dip into a city that small, I was impressed.

>thrive

Not sure what you mean here -- the great artistic hubs of the past that you yearn for were places where artists could congregate, do great work and die penniless. The starving artist meme came out of those guys and their experiences.

If you mean "thrive" in any sort of financial sense, you may be in the wrong filed. If you mean "thrive" in a sense having to do with artistic cross-pollination and growth, I suspect you can find that as readily in a small city as a large, with the advantage that starvation wages can be stretched further in (generally) less expensive small cities than in big ones.

My $0.02, good luck in your quest. If all else fails go to some backward tropical island where the women don't wear tops and be happy...

>>1152111
Maybe, but even so, gotta live SOMEWHERE. Can't live on the Internet, yet.

Not OP, but I would consider the ability to sit down, talk, go over some works in progress in a hands on way, have a cold beer, argue about shit and generally hang-out and cross pollinate ideas in person to be WAY superior to anything you can do on the Internet, but your mileage may vary, of course.

I'd say the American West Coast is where it's at today: everyone and their dog (and his flees too) is doing something, even if it's just streaming themselves arranging flower bouquets. Combine that with exorbitant prices and some Romantic nature not too far from the city centres, and you've got everything you need.

>>1152167
I'd say it was last in San Francisco before the tech take over, and other places on the West Coast, but now it's all hipster post aet scene BS and pass the true scene it once was. Not so much a free exchange of ideas now, but an echo chamber. An art DID exist there once, though

>>1152154
I apologize for being obscure and you deserve a better understanding of what I mean. By thrive I mean to a certain extent what you assumed first, that is a place where the artist could congregate, do great work, and if necessary, die penniless. This could be done in a smaller community sure, but I think what was pivotal in the cities we read of now is a general, shared frustration in a diverse community brought together by their need to create. This can be found in smaller cities, but I think there's a significant difference: so far as my experience goes, in smaller cities part-time artists exist and form a little group that might yield something neat every now and then. For an artist to thrive in a community, I think there needs to be that element of desperation of which we read about now: creation is not a hobby to get together on Sundays and share with in the ideal community, but the sole thing in the mind of the artist; the only thing he is capable of. I think it would be just as bad, if not worse, for the authentic artist to be surrounded by those who create simply for a diversion or for fun than for him to be placed in the center of a population that has neither the appreciation nor desire for art.

I am not sure if this explains what I'm going for, but it is difficult for me to express exactly what it is; if it could be so easily defined it would not be so difficult to find. Again, I appreciate your two cents, they're worth more than that to me. I've tried something similar to the tropical island thing but I would trade a colony of topless women for three or four genuine, ambitious, and desperate artists without hesitation.

>>1152167
>even if it's just streaming themselves arranging flower bouquets
This is sheer vanity and it is far from what I am talking about. I can't imagine what I described exists in a large scale in the States because the heightened sense of self-worth, made almost impervious to reason by the absence of culture mingled with an ignorance maintained with diversions, in the over-whelming majority of those who call themselves artists (I say this feeling comfortable with the generalization I am making) leads to a deluded individual who will compromise the integrity of his work if only to maintain that delusion.

As the poster beneath you says, art did indeed exist there but what I've stated above in tandem with the massive increases in costs of living has expelled the true artists; whether to a desolate void or the 21st century ideal, I'm trying to find out.

>>1152193
The reason the art seen started in Asheville was by artists congregating in abandoned warehouses and grew as like minded people migrated there from across the country through word of mouth, seeking what it sounds like you are.

>>1152198
>art seen
art scene

But there's a reason Asheville has been referred to as a "New Age Mecca" And "New Freak Capital of the U.S." , "the hippie capital of the south" and this goes back to 1996 and 2000. That said, I don' know if the scene is "over" but I don't think you should dismiss it outright without checking it out.

>>1152077
>I suppose the artist flocks to where he can live for little, be surrounded by people not unlike himself, and have the time to create. Is there an ideal place for him today?

Miami