What is art?

[Dagger]

When I decided to start this thread, I was thinking about coming up with a very narrow definition of "visual" art--for example, painting, graphic design, photography, sculpture, etc. In my mind, literature, theater, films and dance fall into a separate category. However, you may talk about any form of art that you desire.

Oddly enough, it was Dave Barry's most recent column that inspired me to ask this question. It's called "Armchair Critic," and basically ridicules "the Serious Art Community." The following quote consists of a selection of excerpts from his article--the parts of it which I could identify with the most.

[quote]"....Let me begin by stipulating that I am a clueless idiot. This is probably why I was unable to appreciate a work of art I viewed recently, titled: 'Chair.'

A lot of Serious Art consists of bizarre or startlingly unattractive objects, or 'performances' wherein artists do something Conceptual, such as squirt Cheez Whiz into an orifice that has not been approved by the Food and Drug Administration for snack toppings.

I managed not to say anything stupid until I encountered a slide projector sitting on the floor, projecting a rectangle of white light and twitching lens dust onto the wall. I asked the gallery person if there was supposed to be a slide in the projector; he patiently explained that, no, this was a work of art entitled 'Autofocus Slide Projector Dust.' I didn't ask why it was on the floor, because I didn't want to make a total fool of myself.

Anyway, in the corner of one container there was a ratty old collapsed armchair--worn, dirty, leaking stuffing, possibly housing active vermin colonies. I asked the gallery person if the chair was art, and she said yes, it was a work titled 'Chair.' I asked her what role the artist had played in creating 'Chair.' She said: 'He found it.' She noted that 'Chair' had been professionally crated and shipped to the art show.

'Chair' is for sale. The price is $2,800."[/quote]

I don't think something like 'Chair' should be considered art. I guess I like to believe that art requires time, patience, and effort to produce--that the world's greatest paintings are labors of love. My main difficulty is coming up with a definition which encompasses both good art and bad, while excluding the truly ridiculous.

Anyway, I look forward to reading your replies. ^_^

~Dagger~

[Shinmaru]

I think art is whatever you make it become...after all, you can pretty much turn anything into a piece of art.

For example, look at Pablo Picasso's "Bull's Head." He made this piece out of a bicycle chair and bicycle handles; however, it's actually quite a creative piece of conceptual art. One would think that it would take quite a creative mind to look at the parts of a bicycle and envision a bull's head.

And, really, that's what art is to me. Art encompasses the ability to think outside the box and come up with some truly radical and innovative ideas...whether it be visual art (paintings, sculpture, even movies) or aural art (music would obviously fall into this category). There is just so much that could fall into the category of 'art' because art is really a broad and ambiguous term.

[Mimmsicle]

[COLOR=darkred]Art to me is something that has been created, sprung from an idea or emotion and then inspires, evokes something within others.

Beauty and originality has no major importance to me - art's main purpose should be to open new worlds and allow people to explore their perception.

Sorry if this is too flimsy ^_^;
But that is art in a nutshell to me - something beyond words and traditionall approach.

- Mimmi[/COLOR]

[Semjaza]

Things like Chair exist in today's art community simply because the artist is smart enough to know that people are pretentious enough to buy it. Things got more and more modern and surreal and things like this and solid red blocks were the result. There's really no other reason. I doubt in a truthful conversation with the "artist" of Chair that he'd give the normal spiel he would give the art patrons this stuff caters to.

In fact, I would do something like that just to make fun of these people. Anyone that would buy it would obviously be an incredibly dumb person and subject to ridicule. My artist buddies and I could all laugh at them in our studios, imaging what outlandish stories the buyer would come up with about Chair to tell their friends. I wouldn't be surprised if some of them thought that way heh.

[eleanor]

[size=1] Art? Art is whatever anyone wants it to be. Some will say drawing is an art, and some will say killing is an art. [Ever wonder why classical music is usually played when violent things are going on in?] If someone were to put a restraint on art, it simply wouldn't be art anymore. Someone can look at a paiting and say, "[i]That's[/i] a great work of art," but the same could be said if someone else looked at a computer. If there was a real definition of art, I wouldn't listen to it anyway.[/size]

[Baron Samedi]

Art is something that draws a person. It does not matter if it is one person out of billions, but if it has some kind of attraction to one person.. it is art.

Art is anything that someone likes. Chair for example is ridiculous. People will like it, because it is so damn abstract and... empty of feeling, but they think they should like it.

Photos can be art, yet take little effort. Almost anything can be considered art I feel.

Personally, while a lot of the modern art and design is pretty, it isn't that great in appeal to me.

There isn't any particular definition of art. Art is something that depends on the person. Some people may call something art, but another person won't. It is subjective to the individual.

[steph6246]

Yea I have to agree w/some of the ppl who have replied. Art can be anything you want it to be, there isn't really a set definition of what art is. If you take a pencil and paper and randomly draw something, thats art, it may not be art to someone else, but you drew it, you did something that involved thinking about drawing, so its art. Art doesnt even have to be painted, or drawn, or any thing that resembles what people think art is. It can be a photograph of nature, or a musical piece someone writes, or someone performing music, thats all art. If in your eyes its art, then its art.

[SasukeUchiha]

"Art is the eye of the viewer."

I like this quote alot because it explains what art is. Everyone has their own opinion and ways to represent their artistic ability. Art is a term in my mind that ecompasses everything around us. Everyone has their own opinion on art, and they are entitled to it.

I guess my answer would be that there is no clear definition...if that makes sense.

[Ryu_Sakura]

Art is:

Love put into a tangible from.
Any sort of feelings (love is not what I consider a "feeling" but a part of life~ Mother's Philosophy)
A carving, a painting, a writing assiment, or even a doodle.
Somthing to express a belief, or an Idea.

That basicly what I think, and yes a chair can be art. Maybe not what most consider art dispite maybe the exact shaping of the seat, or of the back, or even a carving in the wood, but it was created for a use. Is a vase not art because it is [i]used[/i] for somthing other then personal endulgment?

[Baron Samedi]

[quote][i]Originally posted by SasukeUchiha[/i]

"Art is the eye of the viewer."[/quote]

*cough* I believe the true quote is 'Beauty is in the eye of the beholder', but the general message gets through.

And that is quite true, and sums up all that I previously said. If one single person finds something aesthetically pleasing.. then it should really be considered art. Just because one person may not think an old wrench hanging off a nail is art, another might. Therefore, despite the absurdity of it to us, it is art.

'Tis a crazy world we live in.

[SasukeUchiha]

[quote]*cough* I believe the true quote is 'Beauty is in the eye of the beholder', but the general message gets through.[/quote]

Nope ^^ Got that quote from an art critic in the chicago suntimes. ^^ But basically its the same thing.

[Transtic Nerve]

Art doesn't nessisarily have to be beautiful.... there's plenty of "ugly" art...

Art is whatever you make it to be. What I consider art simply isn't what you may consider art. There is no true definition of art, nor can one thing be or not be art...

A poet once wrote a poem, but the paper was a blank peice of paper. That was the poem, a plank peice of paper. The reason: words simple could not relay what the poet felt... so is that art? Are three large canvases covered in white paint hanging on the wall art?

We talk about this in our Aesthetics class. Everyone says alot of crap about how "that's not art, it's horrible" or whatever BS they think up... there is no true answer... it's like "what is love"... who knows....

Art is only what people make of it... there is no other answer....

[John]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Semjaza Azazel [/i]
[B]Things like Chair exist in today's art community simply because the artist is smart enough to know that people are pretentious enough to buy it. Things got more and more modern and surreal and things like this and solid red blocks were the result. There's really no other reason. I doubt in a truthful conversation with the "artist" of Chair that he'd give the normal spiel he would give the art patrons this stuff caters to.

In fact, I would do something like that just to make fun of these people. Anyone that would buy it would obviously be an incredibly dumb person and subject to ridicule. My artist buddies and I could all laugh at them in our studios, imaging what outlandish stories the buyer would come up with about Chair to tell their friends. I wouldn't be surprised if some of them thought that way heh. [/B][/QUOTE]
[B]Exactly.[/B] Like so many other things, it's stupid people that make the art world work. Not that it's always stupid to buy art, but much of the time it is. Like the Chair. I believe Chair is absolutely not art. In order for it to be art, it would have to have been made with intention to be a work of art.

Of course, maybe it was; maybe someone took special time and care to slowly rub in the stains on the chair, or cut the fabric seam by seam. And then, after the artist saw that he didn't like the finished product (or he realized he had just mangled a perfectly good chair) and threw it in the dumpster, where the other "artist" found it and saw that he liked it. Not a probable explanation, but still.

On the other hand, maybe the artist was stupid, too, and actually believed that he was responsible for that Chair being there. See? Stupid people again. They keep our economy going, and at the same time destroy it. They are the perfect balance. At the same time, they'd all be long dead if it weren't for the few smart people in the nation. You're not really reading this anyway, though, your eyes are just slowly scanning the words, absorbing them into your brain as quickly as a cinderblock, aren't you? Yep. That's what I thought. Now, check this out: Sex. Did you see that? Your mind was on complete autopilot until you saw that. Now, go back and reread this thing.

Sorry about that last paragraph. Anyway, my definition of art is something that you create or something already created that you modify in order to get a point, idea, or emotion across. I wish my newspaper printed Dave Barry...

[Queen Asuka]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Baron Samedi [/i]
[B]Photos can be art, yet take little effort. Almost anything can be considered art I feel. [/B][/QUOTE]

[color=hotpink][size=1]And I'm sure you're "biatch" who's in college to become a professional photographer would really appreciate that rude comment.

AND OH MY GOSH! This is the argument of the century! There is not ANYTHING that makes me more angry than when me and Ryan get in the argument about what is art. He claims that it is only a work of art if it has "meaning." I think that is complete and total bull. I have been doing "art" all of my life: I draw, paint, color, etc. But it doesn't necessarily have some odd abstract meaning to it. It is just me expressing myself through a creative outlet. But because it doesn't have a "meaning," then it's supposed not art. Give me a break!

I HATE how these supposed "artsy" people over-interpret EVERYTHING! Spatter some paint on a canvas and it means "happy!" Well excuse me for not generating the artwork of a 3-year old.

There are so many other things that I could say, but just thinking about it is getting me really irked. Oh well...what do you think?[/color][/size]

[Baron Samedi]

[quote]And I'm sure you're "biatch" who's in college to become a professional photographer would really appreciate that rude comment.[/quote]

Actually as I was typing that I had second thoughts.. but forgot to go back and edit it.

What I meant is.. Well, I am no professional photographer, but I know what I like and whilst I have no idea of the technical difficulties involved, if I see something while we're driving or whatever.. I often wish I had a camera. And it doesn't seem that hard to find the right scene.

It is already prepared for you, whereas with painting or scuplting you have to make your piece from the ground up.

See my point? It may be difficult to find.. but you just need to find it. I suppose I should have maybe put 'less effort' than some other art forms.. but I didn't. That was my intended meaning anyway.

[Queen Asuka]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Baron Samedi [/i]
[B]Actually as I was typing that I had second thoughts.. but
It is already prepared for you, whereas with painting or scuplting you have to make your piece from the ground up. [/B][/QUOTE]

[color=hotpink][size=1]That is not necessarily true. The lighting has to be right, the grounding firm and steady, and many many other factors come into play. It's not as simple as just focusing the lens and snapping a button. Ryan and I actually visited an exhibit of some really gorgeous photos taken by a man named Clyde Butcher, I believe. Take a look at some of his stuff and you'll see what I mean.[/color][/size]

[future girl]

[QUOTE][i]Originally posted by Baron Samedi [/i]
[B]What I meant is.. Well, I am no professional photographer, but I know what I like and whilst I have no idea of the technical difficulties involved, if I see something while we're driving or whatever.. I often wish I had a camera. And it doesn't seem that hard to find the right scene.
[/B][/QUOTE]

While it may be simple to find the right scene, it is extremely difficult to make that perfect scene look just as perfect as it does in film as it does in real-time. I'm going to study photography, it's an extremely difficult career choice. It takes true talent and effort to be taken seriously and the technical side of it is...well, difficult. Indeed, sometimes photography is a lot about chance, you're lucky to be somewhere and catch a certain moment, but not everyone can catch that moment as well as others, it's a skill that takes a lot of honing.

As for the original question, it's not really easy to define art. To some people 'Chair' is art, to others 'Chair' is a chair. As stated before, some 'artist' know how easy it is to tell a critique or a musuem curator that a chair symbolizes the inner struggle of good and evil inside us all, and then charge $2000+ for it. Art is a loose category, not all of it has to have meaning, sometimes it can just happen. To me art is an outlet. My pent-up frustrations find their way to canvasas, sketchbooks, notebooks, napkins. I'd never sell a napkin for $2000+, but that's just me.

[Maully]

[color=green]I hate to spew the same thing again... but art is very difficult to define, if it can be at all. I don't cosider "Chair" to be art at all. Especially since the artist "found" it. Art should make a person emote something. It should strike you and make you feel. The feelings could be, "Oh, that's pretty" or something much. much deeper. Art should also come from a place of feeling. These are my humble opinions remember. I don't think that "Chair" came from feelings of the artist, though it may have evoked some long lost memory of his grandpa. Does that make it art? I don't really think so. [/color]

[Kanariya]

[size=1][color=chocolate]I think art is something that is made (or done) with effort, and doesn't have to be 'beautiful' or 'ugly'. Also, I think art is something that is created for a purpose or for entertainment of some sort.

An example of art for a purpose is anything from a cardboard box to a stapler. These things were created for a purpose in life to make it easier for one person, but in some people's view are not art because that they are just everyday items, but really thinking about it, it can be art. Though painting, sculpting, and etc. can be used for a purpose, though I think everyday items really fall into that category.

About entertainment art, it may be from painting a picture to sculpting some kind of statue. Though again, everyday items can be used for entertainment, but things like painting and sculpting, drama, etc. can fall into this category.

About the 'Chair' situation, although all I have explained, I wouldn't find 'Chair' an art. It wasn't created with effort and was found, so I don't find it to fall into the entertainment or for a purpose category I said.

The category thing to some people may sound like crap, but hey, that's just what I think.[/size][/color]

[oshi]

I can't stand modern art. I went to a museum and got stuck with a guide. He pointed to a large, fiberglass, blue block leaning against a white wall and asked, "What do you see in this?" I really wanted to laugh. It had some deep title, like "Lost in an Enigma Falling." All the artist did was send the dimensions to some workshop, and THEY made it. Then he tipped it onto a wall and called it good. This makes me mad because I draw a lot; I love it, but there are people who look at my work and say it's not very good. I'm not confident in it as I am, and that doesn't help. And anyway, if I put a glob of pudding on a board and presented it to an art museum, calling it "The Instability of Life," they would LAUGH AT ME. It's like politics. Stupid politics. It's all in the wheedling.
oshi

[Guest ScirosDarkblade]

I thought about it for about three minutes and decided that from my point of view, "art" would have to be THE personal interpretation you put into creating an object, whatever it is. With that definition, someone DESIGNING a chair is an artist, deciding on what he/she thinks looks nice, etc. It also makes medical illustrators NOT artists, which is probably correct. I think it's a good working definition, as long as you follow my logic.

[Brasil]

Firstly, we shouldn't think so much of using the term "art." It has such lofty connotations that when we use it, we can't get any concrete definition. We all think of "art" as some brilliant, deep, layered piece of work.

It's a societal cliche, really. It's an outdated and archaic term that had relevance in England in the late 1800s.

What I think everyone is missing here, is the process. We will drive ourselves mad when we try to pinpoint just what it is, and drive ourselves mad when we have to say, "Art has no set definition."

Because, the way I see it, the answer is neither of those.

Look at how humanity has progressed over the years...what has been created, what has evolved. "Art" is not a static object. It's a constantly redeveloping animal. But don't think we can say, "Oh, well, art is whatever people think it is now."

That's...not smart. Think about it. We are always going to disagree with others. What we think is art now may be burned when we hit our thirties. Unlikely, I know, but it's happened in history. Entire literary movements spanned 10 years and nothing longer. Authors were threatend with castration.

See, the "art" ideal is volatile.

Yes, there are a few things that stand the test of time, and will always be works of art. *cough*2001 Space Odyssey*cough* However, we are trying to define the entire scope...the spectrum of art.

With that in mind, let me suggest this:

"Art is/as a process."

[Shinken]

Personally, I can't stand some of this 'modern art' stuff that's all over the place these days. A block sitting against a wall does not symbolize anything in my opinion. Art is an expression of human emotion. If you take some tape, make a square out of it, and give it a fancy name, all you've done is wasted a good roll of tape. That's it.

Anime is art, and I don't mean just the pretty pictures. Think about it. There's a story, a message to convey. The characters are supposed to identify with some base emotion we all share. I personally can't identify with the aforementioned piece of tape. (except for being wasted. :alcohol: :beer: ) I [i]can[/i] identify with Kenshin Himura, or Goku.

If it conveys an emotion in a way that people can identify with, then it's art. If you set a block against the wall and say it signifies eternity, well, I'm sorry. I just don't get it.

(As far as the aforementioned 'projector and dust on the floor' thing, I can kinda see the art in that. You watch the dust just float around, and it looks... well, interesting, cool, and there's something about it. Kinda makes you think. What, I don't know, but I've found myself watching the dust in a ray of sunlight. :sweat: )

[eleanor]

[i]AND OH MY GOSH! This is the argument of the century! There is not ANYTHING that makes me more angry than when me and Ryan get in the argument about what is art. He claims that it is only a work of art if it has "meaning." I think that is complete and total bull. I have been doing "art" all of my life: I draw, paint, color, etc. But it doesn't necessarily have some odd abstract meaning to it. It is just me expressing myself through a creative outlet. But because it doesn't have a "meaning," then it's supposed not art. Give me a break!

I HATE how these supposed "artsy" people over-interpret EVERYTHING! Spatter some paint on a canvas and it means "happy!" Well excuse me for not generating the artwork of a 3-year old.

There are so many other things that I could say, but just thinking about it is getting me really irked. Oh well...what do you think?[/i]

Yes, I hate it when I'm drawing some cartoon and people won't consider it 'art' because it's...a cartoon. They expect you to be wearing a funky hat and sleek black clothes while walking around reciting some obscure poem about love and depression or something. I said to someone once, "It'd be cool if I could become an artist that lived in one of those lousy New York apartments and paint all day." and I laughed, but the boy completely killed the side comment by saying that all I did was draw stupid DBZ people. I wasn't exactly happy over the conversation, and I hate people who do that. >_>

[Shinmaru]

I think PoisonTongue is really on to something...the process behind the art is just as important, if not more important, than the art itself.

With a lot of great artists, their artwork can not only be viewed aesthetically but psychologically, as well. Their artwork is a "window to their soul," as it were. Look Vincent Van Gogh; the man was pretty unstable, he was bi-polar (I think he was bi-polar, anyway) and he was rejected in just about every facet of his life. The only medium he had in which to express himself was his art and, in the ten years in which he created his best artwork before killing himself, he created some of the most amazing and haunting artwork ever made.

And that's really the kind of stuff you find when you look at the process behind the art. If you never bothered to look at the process, you'd never know that Van Gogh favored color over form because he felt that color bettered expressed the raw emotion of his work. You can really see some of Van Gogh's work and get an idea of how emotionally unstable he was and how he saw the world...from a psychological standpoint, it's quite incredible.

Just the other day, I had the opportunity to view some slides that my Art History teacher had of some work done by patients of an insane asylum that had been taught to paint by a professional art instructor. Some of the artwork I saw was supremely haunting...it was really representative of how (how can I put this lightly?) mentally unbalanced they were. Looking at some of this artwork was like peering into their minds and I find that sort of thing supremely interesting, heh.

So, yeah, just some random thoughts.