Fun Stuff > MAKE

What is art?

<< < (7/10) > >>

Johnny C:

--- Quote from: Darkbluerabbit on 02 Oct 2007, 17:45 ---Believe me, I looked for some deeper significance, but I couldn't find it.  Maybe I am shallow.

--- End quote ---

It's the transformative power of art.

Khar and I have had this discussion before. I'm still not at the stage where I'm willing to let crass commercialism slide as art - I make a distinction between something designed to make the creator a pile of cash and something designed because the creator feels a need to design it.

KharBevNor:
Hang on Johnny. That's a rather problematic view. If we go down that road we suddenly discover that the amount of things we can call art becomes seriously diminished unless we start going for problematic definitions of commercialism and 'need' that tend to favour a high art/low art distinction and reinforce the western canon. Under such a definition, almost nothing Michaelangelo ever produced, for example, would be art. Very few portraits would be art. The majority of the works of artists like Hogarth and Henry Moore would not be art. The Bayaeux tapestry wouldn't be art. No Ukiyo-e prints would be art. In fact, barely anything before about the mid nineteenth century would be art, and then not everything after that by a long shot. Anyone with even the barest understanding of how the gallery system works would see that even a huge slice of modern art would be rendered into some form of 'non-art'. Even at the basest academic level, it can be hard to seperate 'art' and 'design', and that distinction is only really based on the MODE by which work is exploited commercially...

I mean, to put it in a more blatant way, what you're positing is a system of definitions whereby this random piece of pokemon fan-art I just got off of Deviantart is pretty much pure art:



But this isn't:



This is clearly absurd. Both are demonstrably art, and I believe most people would agree that David is qualitatively better for a variety of reasons (Though I'm sure you could find people ready and willing to argue, quite possibly very convincingly, for pikachu).

muteKi:
Where was it I heard about the musicians saying or singing about how they sold out the minute they started making money on their music, not on their commercial tie-in?

Emaline:
I hate this thread. I fucking hate this thread. I hate this stupid argument/discussion. I went to fucking art school. I had to hear this shit all the time. Everybody who argues this shit can eat my cock.



Ok, first of all, art is, to quote a friend, "absolutely anything that has undergone the key transformative of being modified in some way by conscious human intent to create."

Ok? Got that? Human intent to create.

So, if I work as a musician, or a graphic designer, or any of that shit, and I am making a picture/song for work/money, it can still be considered art. It is fucking art.

Books are art, ok? Writers are artists. They are writing to create.

Something doesn't become not art because it's creator made a buck off of it. Ok? Art is always art.

Photography is fucking art.

And fuck that noise about "Oh it's not art because it didn't take any skill to make it."  Have you dumb asses(and by that I mean anyone who argues that point) never heard of folk art? Folk art is made by people who have had little to no artistic training whatsoever. Those people don't have the "skill" and "knowledge" and they make some awesome things.


Don't tell me that something isn't art because it took so little effort to make. When I was a photography student, I had to hear this every single day. Fuck that. I realize that all I did was push a button, and that is how I created my "art" but did you see that picture right there? Did you notice the natural composition? Fuck all the bastards who want to fucking argue with me about why photography isn't art.


And fuck you, Stuckism. Fuck you hard. Up the ass. Conceptual art is just as much art as the bullshit you do. I really fucking hate Stuckists.



Anyway, best artists in the world are little kids. Give them a sheet of paper and a pencil, and what them make the most beautiful piece of art ever. They don't have predefined ideas of art. They are just fucking free. They think independently. They put whatever they want on a piece of paper. It is amazing.

schimmy:
I think the most important question is this:
Why define art?

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page