|
Post by Rascarin on Jul 20, 2009 17:29:03 GMT 1
So, after mine and Buch's discussion in the "News Poetry" thread about piercings, and how I considered them to be almost artistic, I got to thinking; what is art? How do we define art, and what can be classified as art? I've spent some time trying to formulate my own definition of art. To me, art is expression; be it an expression of emotion, or beauty. For me to see something as being art, it has to make me feel something when I see it. My favourite pieces of art are ones I want to keep going back and looking at, because of the feeling they invoke. That feeling may be awe at some natural beauty, empathy at a depiction of sadness, or horror at something macabre. Take this piece, for example ( link). This is actually one of my favourite photos. None of my family can understand why I like it; they say it is disgusting. And I agree; it is. But it makes me feel something when I look at it; I'm disgusted, but I'm enthralled by it too. The first time I saw it, I looked at it for a little while, then closed the window. But I saw that picture, in my mind, for months afterwards. I had to look at it again. Some morbid fascination compelled me to spend weeks (and weeks - the DA search engine is shit) searching for it again. Now, exhibit two ( link). Another favourite of mine, not just because it is aesthetically pleasing to look at. I like this one because I can relate to the sentiment behind it. It's saying "I'm fine" when you're not, and smiling when you're sad. But beyond that, its a shield. It's using that smile, not just as a mask, but to actually hold people away so they can't get close enough to see past it. This photo is beautiful to me because it mirrors something I've felt exactly. Now, I was going to go on to talk about body art - but I got bored, so I'm not going to. Maybe later. For now, I'll just invite you guys to give your insight on how I defined art, how you define it, whether you think my examples have any artistic value, and to share your own favourites and why you like them (or just say "tl;dr", and ignore me ).
|
|
|
Post by Knightfall on Jul 20, 2009 22:43:26 GMT 1
As long as you're honest with yourself and actually put some thought behind a piece that you do (and as long as it's not destructive), be it writing, drawing, photography, etc., then anything can be art. To rule out even the smallest piece is to deny an entire universe validity, and is to imply that even some bigger pieces are nothing. Now, someone who randomly splashes some paint on a piece of paper without any thought or heart put into it, I wouldn't call that art in the purest sense. And people actually do that, if only to bank on another individual's incomplete perception. I thought that first link was interesting. It could mean all sorts of things. It could have just been created to prompt an emotion bordering on disgust and horror. But it could also be a commentary on the fragility of beauty, and how it literally is "skin-deep." That's what I got out of it. The second link just pissed me off, since I've seen so many people pull that writing-on-their-hand shite so many times. I think Bono did it. Anything Bono does, I hate, for some inexplicable reason. But that's what I got out of it. Maybe that's not what the photographer intended, but that's still a good sign that it prompted something out of me. xD Don't mean to infer that it can't hold meaning to someone else, just...gawd. But, of course, there's really only one piece of art in the world that really matters:
|
|
|
Post by Mister Buch on Jul 20, 2009 23:32:23 GMT 1
I suppose any kind of expression- writing, performance, song - is art. But also I use the word to mean 'good art' - a piece that I find meaningful and a cut above. I do like the first link you sent Rascarin - that's really interestingly disgusting - but in a way that makes you think, beyond 'hey look at this gross stuff'. My first thought was 'what's going on here?' I I kept looking trying to figure out the details of the situation. Made me feel a lot more than just disgusted. I also think the second one was not so impressive. The old smiley-face seems like kind of a tired motif, and I didn't get much out of it. I'm very inexperienced and intimidated by the world of art (paintings and such). I like a lot of stuff I see, always finding something to like, and not knowing what I'm supposed to take from it, or even if I'm supposed to take a specific thing. Maybe that open subjectivity is what scares me- I like beingtold what to do. So - I find it hard to judge art. I absolutely love Picasso's Guernica. -- And of course, Knight, there is ONE more piece of art that matters in this world....
|
|
|
Post by Rascarin on Jul 21, 2009 2:43:36 GMT 1
I guess that second picture has been done before... It was the first of its kind that I saw, though, so I liked it straight away. Not to mention that I really like black and white photography, and that model. Looking past the "seen it before", I still like it in and of itself.
And Buch... is that Arnold Rimmer?
|
|
|
Post by Mister Buch on Jul 21, 2009 10:39:47 GMT 1
Each to her own. You got something out of the second picture that neither of us did, so. And Buch... is that Arnold Rimmer? Yes it is. ;D Series 2 episode 1. He has Kryten paint a picture of him in the formal dress uniform and Kryten rebels by painting it like that.
|
|
|
Post by Tillian Panthesis on Jul 21, 2009 10:49:44 GMT 1
Hmm... Art, that's one hell of a big discussion you guys picked. I've been listening to such complex debate on things as "what is art?"
There's one case where many centeries ago, some French commitee decided that anyone can do art and post in their gallery. Then Machel DuChamp came along and decided to put a cereramic urinal in the middle of the gallery and call it an 'art'. Then everyone srarted to debate weather it's a piece of crap or an 'artistic' expression of his cynical outlook into the world of art. (Also his urinal is still displayed somewhere in the world as we speak in the present time.)
I guess after listening to all that heated debate in the Victorian Collage of the Arts lectre years ago, I guess it's safe to say in anyone's opinion in "what is art?" is more of a merage may vary in every single person. Some people think that imitating the real world in paintings as an art while others who painted a more stylistic sereal look would be concidered an art. I guess it's all boils down to people's opinion and most importantly... intergraty.
I mean seriously, making bland popish songs like Britney Spears might not be art, it's a product due to lack of intergrity in the music world... well for me anyways.
---
By the way Mr. Buch, that last painting you've linked... that was pure awesome. I call that an 'art'.
Now would you excuse me, I'll be in the other room...
*Bahahahahahahaha!*
|
|
|
Post by Mister Buch on Jul 21, 2009 16:29:58 GMT 1
I've seen that DuChamp urinal thing a few years back. I can't stand that kind of stuff. I guess I may be missing the point, but it's just a gorram household object. There's no meaning or expression behind it except 'Hey look at how I got away with this second rate piece of work.' The Rimmer picture is indeed... magnificent. Here is a documentary about its production. www.youtube.com/watch?v=c7FXlRxq1iQ
|
|
|
Post by Zarsthor on Jul 21, 2009 16:50:47 GMT 1
Art is not half a pickled cow. Art is also not taking dead human's and placing them into sexual positions. Anything else pretty much goes as long as you're actually expressing something.
|
|
|
Post by Tillian Panthesis on Jul 22, 2009 11:41:19 GMT 1
I've seen that DuChamp urinal thing a few years back. I can't stand that kind of stuff. I guess I may be missing the point, but it's just a gorram household object. There's no meaning or expression behind it except 'Hey look at how I got away with this second rate piece of work.' Hence that's why i'm right about art being "merage may vary" all people. It's been debated to the death. As for your distain over that urinal 'artpiece', I've recalled there's this Japanese boy who went to a field trip to the Art Gallery to see artworks and they stumbled across the urinal. The Japanese boy disagrees with it. What he do? He pissed into the urinal and treated as nothing more than a urinal in the middle of an Art Gallery. True story. Hence that's his 'reBUTTal'.
|
|
|
Post by Rascarin on Jul 22, 2009 11:53:07 GMT 1
=_=
That was a terrible pun, Tillian.
What happened to the boy after he befouled the art gallery?
|
|
|
Post by Tillian Panthesis on Jul 22, 2009 12:08:48 GMT 1
The Simpsons made me do it! >.<
Anyways as for that boy... I don't know, My Art teacher didn't go further about it in class. -_-
|
|
|
Post by Mister Buch on Jul 22, 2009 14:28:45 GMT 1
Rebuttal ;D According to Steven Fry on QI, a number of people have urinated in it over the years, either as an insult to it or in praise of it!
|
|
|
Post by Tillian Panthesis on Jul 22, 2009 15:41:45 GMT 1
Oh really, that's a new one, Mr. Buch.
Interestingly about that... but a bit gross though.
|
|
|
Post by Zarsthor on Jul 22, 2009 19:53:07 GMT 1
Art is supposed to be used though right? Paintings are supposed to be sued to make the wall look interesting? Statutes to make the garden interesting. Urinals to pee in?
|
|
|
Post by Mister Buch on Jul 22, 2009 20:51:00 GMT 1
Sounds more like furniture. Really good art should be doing more than making a wall look interesting.
|
|