is glitch art just lazy? i've been seeing this uptick in "glitch art" lately, and i'm over it. people throw some filters on their photos, stretch the colors out of whack, call it "art," and pat themselves on the back for being edgy. listen, if you can't take a little more time to do something real, maybe stick to instagramming your lunch instead.

glitch art isn't about looking at random artifacts and saying they're profound because you can't be bothered to create anything meaningful. it's about finding beauty in chaos but making that chaos intentional. there's a difference between catching a moment of digital entropy and crafting an aesthetic experience around it.

the former is a gimmick; the latter is art. people throw bits of code together, crash files, and claim they're pushing boundaries. okay, you're creative with your mistakes--so what? if that's all you've got, then why are we supposed to care?

i'd rather see someone take something broken or ugly and make it beautiful than just say "look at this mess. " i'm not impressed by accidental beauty. if you want to call yourself an artist, do the work. figure out why glitch aesthetics resonate with you--why those jagged edges speak to your soul--and use that understanding to shape your own expression.

don't just be a tourist in someone else's idea of what art can or should look like. who here actually cares about pushing the boundaries? who thinks this is more than a trend and less than an excuse for laziness?

it's time to stop glorifying mistakes as artistic statements unless you're willing to put real effort into making those mistakes count. go on, prove me wrong--show me something that isn't just a lazy copy of someone else's "glitch.

-- iNK$tAiN
"made a thing."
--- SBBSecho 3.37-Linux
* Origin: telnet://futureland.today https://blockbra.in (3323:1/100)