To make the most of your romantic art, you need to follow a few simple rules.

First, don’t apply romantic art to real-world situations. Romantic art is for fun; it’s not supposed to be taken seriously. It’s a kind of game. You can use it to spice up your love life, but it’s not a good idea to try to apply it in real-world situations like business negotiations or arguments with family members.

Because romantic art is for fun, you should make sure that every detail has been carefully considered and every word chosen for maximum effect. Even the smallest slip can ruin an otherwise perfect poem or photo or song. If you are going to take the time to create something using romantic art, it should have exactly the effect you want on exactly the person you want it to have it on.

Example: suppose that you have just met someone whom you think is promising material for a long-term relationship, but who seems at first glance a little too dull. You could try writing her a poem that grabs her attention by telling her how beautiful she is and how much fun she would be as a girlfriend; but if she doesn’t respond well to flattery, she might think that you are shallow and just using this as an excuse

The purpose of romantic art is to make you feel things strongly. It is supposed to make you feel the way you do when you’re in love, or when you’re having a religious experience. It is meant to evoke wonder and awe; it’s for when you want something that will give your life meaning. Of course, most romantic art does not do this very well.

The problem with most romantic art is that it’s boring. You can’t watch Romeo and Juliet or read Wuthering Heights more than once (maybe twice). You can’t listen to Romeo and Juliet or Carmina Burana too many times either—though if you’re making romantic art, you probably have a different definition of “too many” than other people do.

What causes this problem? The same thing that causes all problems: misunderstanding the goal. Romeo and Juliet was not intended to be an accurate representation of Shakespeare’s own love life, or even an accurate representation of what love was really like in Verona in 1596. It was intended to be an accurate representation of what love feels like.

I don’t mean that Shakespeare was trying to fake us out with his play; I mean he understood the psychology behind romance so well that he captured it perfectly, despite the fact that

Most of the romantic art in romantic art is created by two women; one of them is a professional artist, and the other is an amateur. The professional has made a living painting paintings that people might want to love. She has no trouble doing this. The amateur sometimes paints, but most of the time she doesn’t. She would like to paint things that people will love, but she finds it hard.

She thinks about the professional artist’s life. She admires how well the professional artist has learned to see what people love, to make it look easy, to sell it for enough money to live on, and to have time left over for her friends and her family. It seems like a simple recipe: just do what she does! But this is easier said than done. It’s not clear exactly what the professional sees that makes it so easy for her; there is an art in seeing, after all. And it’s not clear why you can’t just be born with this skill; the amateur can’t see what is so special about the professional’s eye any more than she can come up with anything better herself, so maybe there isn’t anything special about it?

The amateur looks at paintings by artists who aren’t as good as they think they are,

The Romantic era in art is characterized by dramatic and intense feelings. The paintings are sexy, the sculpture is sensual, the architecture is dramatic and romantic. It’s what you would expect from a period when people were rebelling against the almost anti-human rationalism of the Enlightenment.

When I was younger I used to look at a painting like Zorn’s “Furor” and think how disgustingly sexual it was, like something you would see in a porn shop. But now when I see it I think of how much it must have meant to Zorn, who after all loved his wife and children deeply and had no interest in being a pornographer. And that makes me feel differently about the painting.

The same goes for every other romantic work of art I can think of – Caspar David Friedrich’s “Wanderer Above the Sea of Fog,” for example, or Beethoven’s “Moonlight Sonata.” When you picture their creators at work on them, you realize that these works were not just exercises in self-indulgence; they were explorations into what was most important to the artists.

What do I mean by saying that? What would be an example of an unromantic work – say something by Picasso?

It is true that some artists are born and not made. But the most romantic art is made, not found.

The best way to make great art is to work hard on it, but in a way that keeps your brain open to what you are doing.

Artists fall into two groups: those who learn how to give their imagination more room, and those who learn how to tame their imaginations. The first group does things like letting themselves have big dreams, or by going to new places and learning strange languages, or writing down everything they remember from when they were young, or taking classes in drawing or music or anything else that interests them.

Taming your imagination means setting limits on what you allow yourself to think about. It means deciding between now and then whether you want to draw people from life, or from photographs of life; whether you want to use oils or watercolors or pencils; whether your goal is to make money or express feelings.*

Art, like any human activity, has a romantic mode. When it is romantic, art appeals to our desire to be surprised and delighted by what we find in the world around us. Romantic art is not just an indulgence; it allows us to live life more fully. We don’t just look at it; we experience it. It gives us a chance to participate in the flow of life rather than just watching from the sidelines.