What is art?
- pburgerposted 13 years ago
0Lisa HW
I cannot ask you what you mean
I cannot use words to help me understand
I can only express an allusion to a thought
And only to the extent and in the vain hope that
A simple reply does not produce yet
Another onslaught of abuse and diatribe
Oh
With something like a docu-drama (maybe one aimed at telling, say, the Benjamin Franklin story, for example), I'd see one that was well done and as accurate as possible (with some "impact" thrown in) as "art". To me, a mediocre one that didn't accomplish the aim of accuracy with whatever impact/emotion it might add would just be "another docu-drama". I suppose, to me, it would be the careful and well crafted inclusion of the right kind of "impact" that might differentiate between art and not-art.
Or, maybe another example would be something like a Hallmark card commercial: A bunch of ad people get together and say, "We want this spot to reach everyone guying his grandmother a card for Mother's Day." If someone comes up with a beautiful-but-realistic commercial that moves the viewer, I might call that "art". The guy who "stars" in an infomercial about selling real estate and making millions - no art involved there.
His commercial is aimed at accomplishing something different in the heart/minds of the viewer.
WARK:
You first said - quote "Art, like beauty, is determined by the "eye-of-the-beholder." unquote
I responded with quote "Yes qwark, fair enough. But IMO that only shifts the question to 'how does the eye determine what is art?" unquote
For you to say I was not clear reveals more about you than you want to see; for I clearly asked "'how does the eye determine what is art?" That is clearly not a statement, clearly a question. Clearly the opposite of your claim against me.
I refuse to follow your dictate - you have no 'authority' to demand anything of anybody in this public domain...
Like it, or lump it!
Stiffus shitus
People are beautiful, some of us are a masterpiece in our own beauty. That's why so many people have been painted on canvas. They are infact, "Art" in their own skin !
I think you need to smile... because I'm smiling at you. Infact, your group asked me to send you a hug... so have one on me *Hug*
Pburger: you said you push the barriers of people's conforming thoughts.
By your own words, pburger, you admitt your a very "pushy" person. Now, what do you know about my thoughts? You say my thoughts are "conforming" , while I think in many cases conforming is an essential part of the cooperation needed to maintain balance,, you clearly have not read my profile, otherwise, you would not be so quick as to suggest I am "all" conforming, all the time. You are talking to me right now, and, based on your other posts to many in this forum. You do come off quite pushy and insulting. Now, go and delete your other insulting posts which you made to other's in this forum, and use whatever trick software you have to rearrange some of the posts so their out of order and that way you know you come off looking so inocent. Aww, but camcorders are a wonderful thing when one is recording Art. Is that not what you said? Your words are Art? In that case, I love the spoken word even more! 
The answer is simple, she is a work of art, everyone born is a creation and therefore, a work of art! Why do you think so many people have been painted ? Answer: to preserve their beauty as many of us are a masterpiece! Oh..and your welcome!
OIC
Thank you for sharing a thought that reminds me of the Buddhist greeting of hands in a praying gesture; to recognize the God in each person. But, because I am not religious, I will more often look for the art of each person.
pburger, I already answered your question up above. So please scroll up and read it. Thanks and your welcome!
- Yes you did, and I apologize for my premature expostulation - I'm like 'the Irish observer' leaping before I look....
If 'art is what ever you want it to be' then ... omFARKINGgodfather I can't ask..bludgeoned into silence, I'll have to learn to live with my ignorance
The Irish observer leaps before looking? Watch out for the cliff...
Thank for sharing that Rochelle,
Would you like to expand that thought. Why do you prefer Daniel's 'definition better than Wiki'?
Cheers
OIC
Do you mean I should be myself? Do you mean I should not use my own style of writing? Do you mean I should tweeter - use 140 characters or less?
Pandoras Box - What the heck is a "current definition of art"? That was my point in the earlier post.
And do you really expect posts on a thread in a hug-page to have the clarity and erudition of a theoretical paper?
I credit you with intelligence, and therefore remind you that the English language has formal, informal, and casual registers. The register of a thread is informal, if not at times downright casual. Hence we encounter misspellings, shortcuts, poor grammar, experiments in language and a potpourri of usage. Again I maybe wrong, but do I ken a strict regimented thinker on the other side of this conversation?
I do not expect perfection from you, in your writing, thinking, or being. Hence, I acknowledge I may be at fault with my interpretation. I hope you extend a generous interpretation to these later posts of mine..
CheersThank you Pandora's Box,
Please help me further. I do not understand what you mean by 'You asked peoples' input regarding what makes art, reject most of what is offered in Socratic style, and refer to a "current definition"'.
Don't get me wrong, I understand the Socratic method, and that I references the term 'current definition" but where have I 'rejected ... what is offered'?
Yours, in genuine need of help
OMG - Look mum - a typo! Hug-pages? Indeed!
- kimberlyslyricsposted 13 years ago0
Wicked shit Kimberleyslyrics
Totally awesome. Clear language, coherent structure, thoughtful insights... And even an argument against 'the concept that art is anything its creator wants it to be'...
Great contribution, thanks heaps
- That sounds so cool :p
Maybe the artist and museum hope to challenge 'straight-jacket morality'?
well said.. and people are beautiful in their own skin, therefore, they are art.
alt poet, I disagree with you. A person is the creation of God's idea. Therefore is art... and even if you say you don't believe in God, I still disagree with you when you say (a person just is) no person just is. Everyone of us is a creation of something GREATER then ourselves. Nothing just is!
once again poet, and for the last time... people are art in their own skin. mountains are art, the sunset is art. anything beautiful is a creation and therefore, a work of art. That's my statement and I'm sticking to it!
bloody good job too or we would all be artless
Stamp your foot all you want, poet.
lol everything beautiful is art! By the way poet...do you line dance with that stomping foot? - Come on susanlang
Are you losing your sense of humor? ;P
Do you really consider your last comment to alternate poet polite and caring, simply because you punctuate your thought with a few smileys?
OIC with a hug
God's idea?
- china manposted 13 years ago0
Thank you China man,
Your that 'Art is just another form of communication' provoke me to ask if the word 'just' is a 'just' word in this context. That is, the word 'just' as you use it, implies 'mere'; 'Being nothing more than...' But I know of one philosophy of language that says communication is a form of social behavior. i would then suggest there is nothing 'mere' or 'just' and communication. The single word 'communication' tends to make obscure a complex phenomenon that bridges physical form with neuropsychological processes.
And then you say art 'communicates the thought that cannot be put into words'. Here I focus on your use of the word 'cannot'. Much of what art communicates is implied but that I suggest is not because the thought 'cannot' be expressed - rather the artist chooses to leave something expressed; else the reader or viewer has nothing upon which to exercise this or her imagination....
Perhaps, my reading is to rigid. Perhaps you can elucidate another view?
Cheers,
Art is love....love of all that surrounds us....
another example of art...
...and the Greek sage has spoken...
Me likee.Methinks - if that is permissible - that the Greek One makes a contradiction.
If 'art needs no explanation or justification' then why does the Greek One feel the need to post an all too brief 'explanation or justification'?
- kimberlyslyricsposted 13 years ago0
- kimberlyslyricsposted 13 years ago0
I think I define art as coming from a creative instinct, as as an attempt to recreate life (or some aspect of it, including internal life) through the art form. So, if a five-year-old has the urge to draw a picture of his family, I'd call that art (a child's art, but art nonetheless). I don't think art has to be beautiful. Some pretty nasty recreations of some of "real life" are art too (whether we like to admit it or not). I suppose, though, my own personal definition would be that a "recreation" of some aspect of life that also nurtured life would be even better.
I'm not a religious person, but I've often thought of the "line" "in the image and likeness..". To the person who believes in God or some higher force, the idea that creativity (or at least creative urge) is directed as recreating life (in some way) could almost seem as if this would be "where creativity and spirituality" meet (even if the person isn't particularly thinking in terms of spirituality when he creates).
Regardless of what/who anyone's "higher power" is; if you think of the concept that man was created "in the image and likeness of God", then the idea that God (or some higher power) may have created man in His/its own spiritual likeness; it would make sense that a the human spirit (a "copy" of a higher spirit) would have an urge to "create" life through art.
All of it would point not just to the preservation of the human species (as in evolution), but to the preservation (through art) of "all of life itself" - on a "higher level" than just the biological thing of a species. I'd think even if you rule out the concept of a higher power creating man in His/its image; it would still make sense that with the development of intellect (in the form of artistic expression) has come the potential of further "advancement" of spirituality (whether or not any particular artist is thinking in spiritual terms when he creates).
So that's my take on the whole art matter (at 6:00 a.m. this multi-coffee morning).I wasn't really arguing anything at all - just "discussing"; but I guess what I did was "extend out" from your references to living in one beautiful place or another, the child, etc.; to the "opposite" of beautiful art and onto less than beautiful images.
So I guess as I was pondering the whole beauty aspect to it, it was just natural that I also pondered that other side to things. Maybe the "old-age shunned" and "dirty-children" remarks got me to thinking of the "less than perfect-beauty" angle.
Post away, dear heart!
Just pointing out that we get the message. You think women are beautiful and some god or the other -or nature perhaps- was the first artist.
Frankly I could argue your position, and it'd be pretty easy, but don't find it worthwhile.
I am glad to see that your latest repitition of it does now include less than physically technically beautiful women. Soon perhaps you'll graduate to including the male figure. Then other animals, and perhaps onto other forms of life.
So does an amoeba qualify as art? It may not be technically beautiful on the outside, but it was created by something bigger than itself. By your definition it should qualify.
So keep reiterating, I don't think your statement is yet complete.
Big hugs!Based on your experience, how many marks of Cain does it take before one turns into a full-blown troll?
deosfluviatilis: you can come down off your soapbox now and stop ranting in such a rude ugly manner. I'm sure all your careless insults left a sour taste in your mouth. Everyone knows an amoeba is a cell. And yes.. I have a right to think it is art. I realize cells are well studied by science. As for the rest of your meanless rant, I sure hope you feel better now that you had a chance to abuse me.
Sending your group's hug right back at ya
Now try and relax before you burn up your keyboardLang's right deosfluviatilis
Be more passive with your aggression - try and learn from some of the wonderful examples we have here, you nawty boy you
obligatory deosfluviatilis
I did not 4get the *hugs*
They are there but because I wear a brand imposed by 'you-know-who' they turn invisible
But so nobody should feel left out of the circle - here in terrestrial language is a mystical hug !@#$%^ &*()_+
Some people believe abusive art is over rated! I have to agree
That's odd - because I think you make abuse quite an art
obligatory pburger: I think you don't think. You just push everyone around as you admitted in this forum when you said, you like to push everyone's "conforming thoughts" as far as you can. That is controlling as well as abusive. I don't feel your earlier profound slang swearing was missed at all. You changed your font slightly, but the potty mouth in you came through loud and clear.
awww, as I said, camcorder's are wonderful and, as you said, your potty words are real art!
I disagree violently with you and find your post to be both insulting and childish!
Plus, the picture of your fish is making me hungry!Oh come now Pandora... I mean deosfluviatilis
Surely your 'galaxy rasbora' is big enough to satisfy everybody's hunger
Greek One: whoever you are, I like you and your sharp witty humor. I really mean that, Greek One.
i can't make love to you... I am a married man, and 20 years over my sexual prime
But i still like ya!Greek One: no.. no.. I never said anything about making love. Goodness...I'm a very happy and married woman. But I still like you in other ways... as I said above here. so smile...
Madly pontificating
Wildly expostulating
Frantically reasoning
Irrationally concluding
Stop the worm turning
Nah! Stop the word turning
Nah! Nah! Stop the world turning
We should all get off - on good drugs!
- zampanoposted 13 years ago0
Hail Zampano,
Soul, pure, creation, all mean nothing to me... so the phrase 'excrement of the soul' is certainly grammatical, and even has a poetical ring, but what it means is beyond my imagination.
working from the body waste of the immaterial part of a person, the closest I can come to imagining something is a spirit, pants around her knees, and a dung-ball dangling from her backside...
When you coined the phrase, was that what you had mind?- 'the stinking character of excrement' lasts while the pile of dung is fresh and wet - dry dung is not so foul And the size of the dung-pile is also a factor in the strength of stench. So the fresher the artist's ego, the bigger the dark mind, and the fouler the stench of the secreting excrement?
- zampanoposted 13 years ago0
I'm not surprised that the term "excrement" is not appealing.
Futhermore, in an aquatic environment, it really is not the best, I agree. It can be rather troubling.
But also in aquatic environments, some creature's excrements (and not soul's) are nourishment for others.
So, for your pond I'll say that art is the PETCO of the soul. Pretending to be innocent is not art.
Yes... timorous, creating things out of wood is an art! Do you still create things out of wood?
Oh no problem timorous, my friend creates many things out of wood. Maybe someday you might find the time to get back to creating art with wood again.
About what you said regarding my avatar, really? It was not my intention to look hot or steamy, I'm sorrry the avatar comes off that way! Maybe I'll change it now!
BTW me = deosfluviatilis. I'm not supposed to offend people under that name. Figured it would be safe enough in an art thread.
- LMAFO
Well there you go!
Why would you 'cark cark' presume you can offend people in a thread on art? 'cark cark'
I think "less than the purest form" is fine. I just think it's OK (even important) to define a "purest form" and go from there. Some things (songs or movies may be a good example) may start out as "less than the purest form" of art but earn their place as "art" once they've been well received as a result of having some impact (other just sales, which are the result of being well received) on people. Maybe an example would be the movie, "It's A Wonderful Life" which kind of earned its way to "art" status after becoming a classic. Maybe the original motives for making that film wouldn't put it in the "purest art" category, but earning a place alongside "purest art" isn't such a bad thing either.
The box is sometimes like a hollow brain without anything in it. I placed a small pan in a box once and called it a work of art.
OIC - you 'placed a small pan in a box once and [you] called it a work of art'
Well for me, that is not the measure of art. As you keep alluding, an opinion, and especially my opinion, is worthless. So, before I deem something I make to be art, I ask 'Does anybody else think of it as art?' That, for me, is the only valid measure of art. For, the value of art, in my worthless opinion, is found in the life of another person. Art is social not personal. But hey, that's only one 'worthless' opinion from one 'mindless' hubber...
Oh Susan, you're a sly one..I love it...
@pburger; I used the word "fairly" on purpose. True, many animals do use colour and found objects to attract a mate. However I think that it's purely instinctive, and that their brains are not capable of any such reasoned thought, compared to how human brains have evolved to be able to make comparisons and judgements based on prior experience. Besides, most lower animals can't change their colours if the mate doesn't like it.I think I glean something from your post
thank you
- hasta la vista amigo the lunatics know where you go....
Art is what ever you want it to be
Related Discussions
- 29
Religious extremists - subjective?
ALL religions have their extremists, that hopefully, most of society identify as being violent nutters.But when does "harmless" religion move along the continuum and become dangerous extremism? When people get killed? One person's terrorist is another person's hero.Surely...
- 23
Can you understand a person's characteristics through his/ her writings?
Can you understand a person's characteristics through his/ her writings?
- 13
Who has the best Hub and what is it?
Everyone is the best..
- 295
Good and Evil
"Good" and "evil" are concepts we apply to human behavior. When are these terms accurate, and when are they labels of convenience we apply out of laziness or prejudice?
- 6
WRITING is a CRAFT not an ART?
I got a fortune cookie that said this and thought it was odd because it pertains to me.What does that mean? Anybody understand this?
- 23
Are crafted objects "Art"? When?
I'm wondering if anybody else ponders this. I have always felt that the distinction between "art" and "craft" is a very picky, very snobby, fine-line distinction wherein one should tread very lightly, very carefully. But instead, I have seen reference (especially in...