What is Art?

[Webby]

See, this is where it /does/ get interesting Daniel =]

Are you looking at art for art's sake, or propaganda?

BINGO! I wanted to write my dissertation in opposition of it, but because that's the obvious thing to do in philosophy my lecturer wanted me to support it instead. Although no one has ever done an explicit support of art for art's sake or aestheticism before so I'm finding it difficult to find resources to help me. My dissertation's more on the philosophy side of it, where we just find logical arguments that we don't necessarily have to believe in, and try to convince people as much as possible. Part of my dissertation is "what are the implications of this theory?" and I'm gonna go into detail about how the theory would make historical, religious and cultural art meaningless, but that's something I have to bite the bullet about. It's obvious that these pieces exist and are meaningful, buuuuuut I'm a little constrained on what I can actually say :\

[MRxo]

My posts are art #carpediem

[Latias Tamer]

Art is something that that is seen as a form of conventional or unconventional beauty, as perceived by an individual person. There are no laws as to what is and isn't art.

[Turner]

What is Art?

Baby don't paint me, don't paint me...no more.

[Milsap]

So what about Performing Arts then? How is that different from art in the sense of Monet or Van Gough?

OP raised a relevant question.

[SirBlaziken]

3 words:

Art is complicated

[8bit]

Art is whatever you want it to be.

Totally incorrect. Art cannot, and never will be, whatever people say they want it to be. Art must derive from a source of inspiration, in which fuels creation or the making of a art, in order to be art. The work must be thoughtful, and it must be equal balanced with great conceptual headspace and the seven elements of art itself (line, color, texture, form, value, shape, space).

For what reason was the Sistine chapel commissioned?

Why did Salvador Dali paint the surreal works that he did?

What was the true meaning behind Picasso's exploration behind the human body, and why was he trying to achieve that?

What must we consider the purpose of the DADA movement?



Art must evoke emotion, and if it does not have that 'affeckt' on someone it does not mean the work is not art. Hypothetically speaking, it may just mean that the work is bad art, opposed to good art.

[lets all go out for some frosty chocolate milkshakes]

//whispers// hey that post was about 2 years ago its ok they've probably changed their mind since then or whatever

[Lord Raven]

yeah and besides i believe their response wasn't meant to be taken too literally, though the debate forum has been quite a bit more of a soap box whenever someone posts than an actual debate forum

[MonsterMon64]

Totally incorrect. Art cannot, and never will be, whatever people say they want it to be. Art must derive from a source of inspiration, in which fuels creation or the making of a art, in order to be art. The work must be thoughtful, and it must be equal balanced with great conceptual headspace and the seven elements of art itself (line, color, texture, form, value, shape, space).

Art must evoke emotion, and if it does not have that 'affeckt' on someone it does not mean the work is not art. Hypothetically speaking, it may just mean that the work is bad art, opposed to good art.

So you're saying for something to be art, it has to be open to interpretation, but also executed masterfully, and if it isn't then it's not "good"? I ask because I've been struggling with what makes art "good" or "bad" for a while now. There are so many forms of art that it's not always immediate when it's good, but bad art (or at the very least art that fails to invoke emotion) is usually noticeable.

I've been fed in recent years so much that whether something is good or bad is subjective, but I can't find myself agreeing entirely. Art follows standards like most things, yes? Yet one man's trash is another man's treasure. Where is the "objectively good" in art? It probably varies from case to case, medium to medium, but I'm certain it's there.

[kindtocrows]

art (n.)
early 13c., "skill as a result of learning or practice."

At least that's an extremely abbreviated version of the definition on dictionary.com.
Also:

Fine arts, "those which appeal to the mind and the imagination"... ..."decorative design and handcraft"

If you accept dictionary definitions, basically, everything that was designed and/or created by someone is art. Art is too broad a term to really be debated. Even fine art, which is what is really being debated here, is pretty much just "something that makes you think or something that is visually appealing."

[Spriter]

People see Art differently, so what someone (or many) see as the best piece of Art out there might mean nothing to someone else.

Whatever gets an emotional response varies between person so there's no concrete thing as to what is Art and what isn't, if you define Art as provoking such a response.