Most provocative thoughts on art. EVER.

Just wondering if anyone wanted to talk about the Freddy's philosophy on art. I saw this movie 5 years ago and still think it's one of the most provocative ideas, presented in the most striking way.

Freddy, the film maker, comes to the realization that art is corrupted by the fact that it is observed. In particular, he thinks the artist himself taints the art with his involvement. So he starts setting up unattended cameras all over the city, or straps a camera onto his back, so that no human eye will interfere.

Of course that's a bizarre extreme. But the idea affects all published art. For example, how many times have you liked a cool band when they're unpopular & original. Then suddenly they become famous and they start making songs that sound like the same commercial hit formula?

That's how I interpret Freddy's thoughts. He is talking about artists selling out. And it's very true, whenever an artist (or musician or filmmaker) realizes he or she is being observed, everything changes.

And when you get right down to it, many of the world's most respected artists never found recognition in their life, and maybe that's why they made great, original, uncompromised art. I read somewhere that Van Gogh never sold a painting, Emily Dickinson only published about 20 of her 2000 poems, or if you want a real trippy thought: Beethoven was deaf when he composed his greatest compositions. Isn't that what Freddy seemed to be getting at? The world's greatest art must be made in a vacuum?