• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Art or Not

Piscivore

Smelling fishy
Piscivore
Joined
May 18, 2004
Messages
27,388
Location
Home is wherever I'm with you
cgnotart.gif


What is your definition?
 
Hehehehe, Ok I think of art as something created by man that appeal's to your sensations. Funny cartoon, it is art. Now then that would be a fairly liberal definition including written, visual, taste, touch, and/or sound.
 
"art" is anything which is placed in a context to be viewed as "art", I know its kind of circular, but basically "art" is whatever anyone claims it is.
Where the "conceptualist" movement went wrong is in assuming that just because they claim that something is "art", they assume that it is "good" or "worthwhile" art.
 
Art is stunt communication.

It is good art if it is a good stunt. Communicating something interesting is a bonus but not at all necessary.

It is bad art if it is a bad stunt.

Art critics would have you believe that the quality of the stunt is unimportant and what is communicated is important. This is because anybody can tell a good stunt from a bad stunt without any need for an art critic.
 
Call me old school, but I like art being beautiful. Which is a whole 'nother bucket of monkeys in itself.
 
TragicMonkey said:
Call me old school, but I like art being beautiful. Which is a whole 'nother bucket of monkeys in itself.
Click to expand...
Monkey art needs to be beautiful? Then there is the question what defines beauty to a bucket of monkeys? I think a movie is art but maybe not beautiful.
eta also Picasso did a lot of stuff which I would not call beautiful but I would call art.
 
Anything that I believe is art, is art. If I do not think it is art, then it is not art.

If you apply the above sentence to yourself then you pretty much have a good description of art IMHO.

There might be any number of "art critics" who will tell you that four wheelbarrows welded together and painted blue is art, but as far as I'm concerned it's not. If you happen to think it is, then it is.

If you can produce something that I think is junk but others think is art and sell it to them, good luck to you. You are a successful artist and I wish you well but I still think your stuff is junk.

If you produce something that I think is art but never make a cent off it, I still think its art.

My art philosophy in a few short sentences.
 
A picture with trees, a lake, and a cabin, that's not art. Put in a waterfall and a sunset...some more trees...make it a forest... have a deer standing by the waterfall...THAT'S ART!
 
One more attempt at a definition art is something created or preserved by humans for other humans to see that at least for some appeals to their sensations and/or emotions. If it is something for yourself then you can call it whatever you want to since no one else cares because they will not see it.
 
I think art can be made solely for the artist's viewing and still be art.

I'd also expand your definition to include appeals to thought, not just sensations and emotions.
 
TragicMonkey said:
I think art can be made solely for the artist's viewing and still be art.
Click to expand...
My point was it doesn't need a definition unless it is shared.

I'd also expand your definition to include appeals to thought, not just sensations and emotions.
Click to expand...
I am not so sure about that. A technical description may stimulate thought but not be art. It needs to appeal to more than just thought.
 
Dogdoctor said:
I am not so sure about that. A technical description may stimulate thought but not be art. It needs to appeal to more than just thought.
Click to expand...

I disagree. I think current culture places too much importance on the emotions. Everyone thinks their feelings are so important, and worthy of communicating. Sometimes they might be, but usually they're just of interest to the person feeling them. Emotions are largely just chemicals in the brain, after all. A work of art which is detached is still a work of art, just as much as a very emotional work of art.
 
Spock....is that you? :) The directions on how to assemble a piece of prefab furniture might stimulate thought but not be art.
 
Dogdoctor said:
Spock....is that you? :) The directions on how to assemble a piece of prefab furniture might stimulate thought but not be art.
Click to expand...

I didn't say everything that provoked thought alone was art; I merely asserted that not everything that fails to provoke emotion isn't necessarily not art.
 
TragicMonkey said:
I didn't say everything that provoked thought alone was art; I merely asserted that not everything that fails to provoke emotion isn't necessarily not art.
Click to expand...
Probably we would agree on a general definition but we both lack the vocabulary to describe it more precisely.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom