What is Art?

[Aix]

I honestly find some displays I see in galleries rather random and not even appealing to look at. I'm bringing this up because our class recently went to the Ontario Art Museum and in particular there was a special display of an artist and Chinese activist called Ai Weiwei. I get that he's trying to convey a message and use symbolism, but really, is a series of photos of him flipping off various iconic structures around the world (Eiffel Tower, Tiananmen Gate, Colosseum, White House and one more which I don't exactly remember) really art? There's also a pile of porcelain crabs, there is some sort of Chinese pun with crabs and internet censorship, but otherwise... seriously?

 

And there's also that painting of three lines that sold for millions of dollars and now sits in Canada's national art museum in Ottawa.

[spoiler='Picture'][/spoiler]

 

So discuss what is art and what you think about stuff like above.

[вєgσттєη ιηѕαηιту]

Art is more than just what's drawn, painted, sang, designed, or written. Art is a passion, a life, a story, and love. Art is more than what you see when you first look at it. And everyone has different tastes in art.

 

To me, Art is what you make it and the way you perceive it. It's also about who designed it. If an artist is very reputable then his or her art is worth more.

 

Honestly, I find all art fascinating, including the one in this topic.

[.Rai]

Art is not inherently linked to effort, which I think is the misconception that comes from modern art. Art is, by definitions we've made ourselves, a medium in which something is expressed creatively. The argument that 'anyone could paint a few lines' is usually meaningless because the reputations of a lot of artists that do paint modern art are due to building up a rapport, one that wouldn't exist without critics and an audience perhaps understanding the message behind something. Of course, there's still a great deal of art snobbery around, of which a lot of it is horrendously expensive auctions for paintings due to fame rather than talent, but that's not really to do with the act of art itself, just the industry.

In some parallel universe, 'modern' art is probably considered the norm, and pre-Modern art to be weird and irrelevant. It's all about perspective. That said, I'd definitely prefer to see a traditional painter or photography exhibition over a 'modern' art exhibition any day. Mostly preference though (I have a lot of choice; it's always good to live in a capital city with a billion free art galleries).

[~ P O L A R I S ~]

Art...

 

 

...IS AN EXPLOSION!

[Aix]

Art...

 

 

...IS AN EXPLOSION!

My friend told me to say that when the tour guide asked us what art was.

[Night]

Art is quite literally the most fascinating thing in the world. The act of manipulating a certain medium in order to literally formulate ones thoughts onto a canvas is fucking magical. 

 

I think people often mistake art for a practice, art isn't like anything else in the world, there is no other hobby or profession that can compare to art because art isn't comparable to anything. In order for a basketball player to be successful they must average a standard set of data values, be it rebounds or whatever other trivial bullshit goes into making a well trained monkey. For an artist to be successful there's only one key precursor and that's the ability to accurately convey what they've formulated in their mind. There is tremendous meaning in the simplest of brush strokes, for the artist that alone is enough to convey that message, but for the mass populous it might not be. That's not the fault of the artist, in their eyes, the picture's finished regardless of what you might deem as inconclusive or lacking. 

[bury the year]

In response to Aix, Ai Weiwei is primarily an anti-authoritarian political activist who rallies against the PRC's perceived suppression of democracy and human rights. I've seen his art, and a lot of it I believe isn't supposed to be viewed for its aesthetics, but rather for its political message. The exhibition where he painted over Han dynasty vases with Coca-Cola logos, for example, was supposed to speak about China's increased commercialization "selling out" its history.

[Βyakuya]

Art is defined in the eyes of the observer. There will be artists that will make the simplest works to allow viewers to perceive it. Through any medium, the power of creativity or perception can give that piece a voice. And that voice can evolve humanity in terms of style and preference. My art teacher in Middle School once said, "If art had never existed, we'd all be still naked in a tree."

[Ire]

Art is something inexplicable. but when you come face to face with a piece of art, you know it's art

[Rapidfire]

Let's not over think this, art is art. It's that simple. Giving art a definition is pretty hard, and once you do give it one it turns out to be so much more. It's like a composition of the feelings and experiences the artist is going through (painted, written, sung, etc). It's the probably the most impacting thing out there. And the thing I love about it is that I can pull out more then one concept, create more then one image withing this piece. I love how I can just think whatever I'd like of it whether it be my own or someone else's. The way I interpret it is my own expansion of perception and creativity. 

[Toffee.]

Technically, if you think about, anything can be art.
I mean, as long as its something that has someone using some kind of medium as a means of self expression and/or conveying an idea in some manner, then one can create that emotion/thought/idea/etc in the various shapes, lines, etc, they choose.
It's obscure, yes, but because art at it's core tends to be rather unorthodox, it's hard to pinpoint an exact way to describe it.

...
Or something like that.

[Akira]

I don't know but apparently Crazy Redd will sell a lot of fake stuff.

[Just Crouton]

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

 

Art is anything.

 

It can be the Mona Lisa.

 

It can be a giant red circle on a blue background.

 

Art can be a statement, be it about the contemporary political climate, society, or about the artist who made it.

 

Art can tell us about the period it was made, be it caveman paintings, or commissions for patrons.

 

Art is your vision.

 

And, everybody has a different vision of what art is.

 

Therefore, there is no correct way to view art.

[Tormented]

What isn't art?

Now that is a more difficult question.

[:^)]

Is writing art? Is this thread art?

Maybe..

[Tormented]

Writing is art and this thread  arguable can be art depending on how it's looked at.

[Aix]

Then, a change in question... What is "good" art?

[Just Crouton]

Then, a change in question... What is "good" art?

_________

 

Anything. "Good" is subjective.

[Shradow]

Anything. "Good" is subjective.

 

Eh. There are a lot of things out there that are undeniably crap.

[Aix]

_________

 

Anything. "Good" is subjective.

However, humans tend to gravitate towards certain things, which then can be called "Good".

[.Rai]

How 'good' art is is definitely subjective. Van Gogh's paintings weren't considered much during his day, but are considered as some of the greatest art in modern day.

Art's definition is constantly changing, which is why it's so difficult to understand. At its core is the concept of expressing something creatively, but creativity, as well as the cultural and social backdrop, are always shifting about; our views and our culture never stay the same. What's good one day could be awful the next (obviously, these are extreme examples, but this ebb and flow does occur a lot).

Expression is probably the one word that I would link with art inherently. Also, there's the fact that art is a two-way experience between artist and observer (the artist and observer may be the same person, to note). How 'good' something is is probably how well a piece does to achieve its definition: Does it express anything to the observer? Because an observer's view is different to another, whether art is 'good' or 'bad' is basically entirely subjective.

Where stuff like art critique comes from is working on principles that aid expression. Colour theory, anatomy, and the like all exist essentially to make the expression of a piece of art more effective, and the lack of it to do the opposite in a similar vein - some art exists purposefully for the sake of expressing nothing. The rules of art definitely don't exist for the sake of giving some sort of rule to art. The assumption usually will be that following these guidelines, which exist as a result of the human psyche itself, and how we will associate senses, sights, with emotional states of minds, will make the overall piece more expressive.

If something doesn't follow the rules that come from the human mind itself (since we've defined these rules, not aliens), we can only assume that it isn't creating expression as well as it could, and therefore could be improved. That's as far as 'good' and 'bad' I'd go in art, personally.

[Just Crouton]

Eh. There are a lot of things out there that are undeniably crap.

_______

 

Again, subjective.

 

A lot of people can say something is good or bad, but that doesn't mean it's good or bad. That just means a lot o people like/hate it.

 

I could say that Rob Liefeld's infamous promotional piece showing Captain America with massive boobs is far better than Sandro Botticelli's The Birth of Venus, and many will disagree. That doesn't make me wrong for appreciating an artist (almost) universally hated by comic book fans over a well-regarded painter from the Renaissance, that just means I have different tastes.

 

If there's one thing I've learned in college, everybody approaches art their own way, and there is no work of art that is correct to like or dislike.

[:^)]

Everything is subjective, such is life.

[Kyng's Old Account]

I consider Art to be one of the many visual mediums we use to attempt to reflect the Conceptual World in reality. The more beautiful the piece of art, the closer to said World's reflection it is.

[:^)]

I consider Art to be one of the many visual mediums we use to attempt to reflect the Conceptual World in reality. The more beautiful the piece of art, the closer to said World's reflection it is.

Would you consider literature a visual medium, since you can see the words?