Sometimes the curtains are blue because the artist likes blue.

Sometimes the curtains are blue because the artist's childhood bedroom had blue curtains and they subconsciously remind the artist of some aspect of their youth, but they've no idea that's why they wanted to draw blue curtains as they were replaced with blinds when they were pretty young, and they've forgotten about having had blue curtains, so if asked, would say they just liked blue.

And sometimes the curtains are blue because the artist wanted a blue background for space curtains, but didn't have enough time to add the stars, planets, spaceships and aliens.

Art class was basically just me imaging what pretentious shit my teacher wanted to hear the most.

A review for a story I wrote involved the reader assuming I was making references to popular media that I didn't intend at all and some were inspired by something else entirely.

I think this type of interpretation often indicates the state of mind of the audience member rather than the artist. It's perfectly fine, but it might be more accurate to say, "when I see the artist's blue curtains, it makes me think of..."

The fun part is that sometimes it is on purpose and sometimes it isn't and I like seeing how people interpret both and what they get out of a work intentionally or not.

[Actual artist, wanting to seem cool for a change] Yes. Totally painted that as a statement about materialism. Yes. That's what's up.

One time in kindergarten I colored the sky green because I'd lost my blue crayon.

I'm pretty sure the Hopper story is fake though

Reminds me of a story about Jackson Pollock, don't know if it really happened though or is just a joke.

At a Jackson Pollock exhibition, there was a group of art connoisseurs discussing one of his paintings where it was all black and gray except for one little streak of red. They were going back and forth saying what they all thought he meant by it. Was it the futility of man staring into the void, was it that even in darkness there is always hope, etcetera.

But then Jackson Pollock showed up and some one asked him and he told them, "Oh that? That happened when I was painting that one over there"

I used to work for a company doing advanced screenings of movies. Usually someone who worked on the movie would be there for an interview after it finished screening. The audience questions are usually terrible. I'll never forget the time Nash Edgerton was there to talk about The Square.

The movie's plot hinged on one character missing a phone call. Someone in the audience (obvious film student/nerd) asked him if missing the call was "a social commentary on our relationship with technology."

Nash says, "I don't know man. Sometimes I just miss phone calls."

This reminds me of probably my favorite digital art that I made when testing the art program that I now use all the time. It was my oc giger aiming his gun in some mountain range during a thunderstorm and it looks fricken sick to bad I forgot to draw his thumb so now his gun is just floating in his hand because I was forced on figuring what I can do with all the new brushes I had access to and my god I hate how the it all looks cool so long as you don't focus on the amputated thumb

I thought it was because the painting doesn’t show the whole diner? It cuts off on the right side, but it (the exit) would have to be over there (if it were a real place). Does a painting have to show every angle of a thing being painted?

ThatIsMighty should have just played it cool