When Is Art, Art, And When Is Art, Nonsense.

Use this forum to have philosophical discussions about aesthetics and art. What is art? What is beauty? What makes art good? You can also use this forum to discuss philosophy in the arts, namely to discuss the philosophical points in any particular movie, TV show, book or story.
User avatar
TigerNinja
Posts: 92
Joined: July 23rd, 2016, 3:59 am

When Is Art, Art, And When Is Art, Nonsense.

Post by TigerNinja » February 28th, 2018, 5:37 pm

(Forgive me, I still use bing)

Is this art: https://www.bing.com/images/search?view ... ajaxhist=0

Is this art: https://www.bing.com/images/search?view ... ay&first=1

Now after looking at both of those, tell me the difference. Personally, the only difference I see is a change of vibrancy of colours and detail. At what point, does art lose its function as art. Art, due to its abstract nature, is such an indefinable thing, and therefore, there is a clear position of relativity with what is art. Beauty (I'm making another topic, named "Is Art Beautiful?"), like art, is relative, therefore at what point does art lose its status as art. Personally, I believe that art doesn't exist to begin with. It is just a certain term that we apply to certain things on a canvas or wall that seem either pleasing to the senses or have vibrant colours with particular detail. Its like with language and words (I'm making yet another topic, "Is Language Art?" and "What Is Language?"[General Philosophy]), whereby we assign certain meanings to certain symbols. These meanings then get ingrained in our head and we 'know the meaning of them'. They have no inherent meaning, solely the meaning we apply to them that we interpret. Someone in China who doesn't know English would find this just as complex and in-understandable (for lack of a better term) as we find Chinese (Mandarin or Cantonese, I am lost with both due to their use of symbols I have never learnt to pronounce).

So in conclusion, at what point is art no longer art. At what point does it just become an ugly splodge and mess of colours. For example, would you consider "Red over Black" art?
"All truth passes through three stages. First, it is ridiculed. Second, it is violently opposed. Third, it is accepted as being self-evident." ~ Arthur Schopenhauer

Eduk
Posts: 1941
Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
Favorite Philosopher: Socrates

Re: When Is Art, Art, And When Is Art, Nonsense.

Post by Eduk » March 7th, 2018, 5:22 am

They are both clearly art? What you seem to be asking is if they are both good art?
Unknown means unknown.

Burning ghost
Posts: 2641
Joined: February 27th, 2016, 3:10 am

Re: When Is Art, Art, And When Is Art, Nonsense.

Post by Burning ghost » March 7th, 2018, 1:47 pm

I would say intent and perspective.

By this I mean that we can view something with an "artistic eye," yet by doing so we do not strictly "produce art." I wouldn't conflate "beauty" with "art" either, because art can be ugly and still be art - if someone wishes to disgust with their artwork and does so they've done "good" art.

I've already expressed my opinion about "conceptual art," so you know how I feel about that.

As for language I was tempted to comment on that thread, but I have to draw the line somewhere. If we're going to start to call all means of communication art then we may as well stop using the term if we're willing to spread it so damn thin across every category of human life - there are aesthetic and emotional qualities embedded in all parts of human life, but I don't think that makes all human life about "art," but if you're an extremely artsy person, and particularly eccentric, then you may well insist that EVERYTHING is "art" - to me that would be nothing more than a semantic befuddlement; albeit one I could sympathize with to a reasonable degree.

Emotion is in everything, that is how we "see it." Art is generally the craft of tapping into that in some way or another.
AKA badgerjelly

User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 3029
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: When Is Art, Art, And When Is Art, Nonsense.

Post by LuckyR » March 8th, 2018, 1:11 am

TigerNinja wrote:
February 28th, 2018, 5:37 pm
(Forgive me, I still use bing)

Is this art: https://www.bing.com/images/search?view ... ajaxhist=0

Is this art: https://www.bing.com/images/search?view ... ay&first=1

Now after looking at both of those, tell me the difference. Personally, the only difference I see is a change of vibrancy of colours and detail. At what point, does art lose its function as art. Art, due to its abstract nature, is such an indefinable thing, and therefore, there is a clear position of relativity with what is art. Beauty (I'm making another topic, named "Is Art Beautiful?"), like art, is relative, therefore at what point does art lose its status as art. Personally, I believe that art doesn't exist to begin with. It is just a certain term that we apply to certain things on a canvas or wall that seem either pleasing to the senses or have vibrant colours with particular detail. Its like with language and words (I'm making yet another topic, "Is Language Art?" and "What Is Language?"[General Philosophy]), whereby we assign certain meanings to certain symbols. These meanings then get ingrained in our head and we 'know the meaning of them'. They have no inherent meaning, solely the meaning we apply to them that we interpret. Someone in China who doesn't know English would find this just as complex and in-understandable (for lack of a better term) as we find Chinese (Mandarin or Cantonese, I am lost with both due to their use of symbols I have never learnt to pronounce).

So in conclusion, at what point is art no longer art. At what point does it just become an ugly splodge and mess of colours. For example, would you consider "Red over Black" art?

An apple is food. An apple pie is cuisine. A slice of apple as a garnish on an apple tartlet is cuisine. When does the apple cross the line from food to cuisine?
"As usual... it depends."

Name Is Unnecessary
New Trial Member
Posts: 14
Joined: May 19th, 2018, 9:32 am

Re: When Is Art, Art, And When Is Art, Nonsense.

Post by Name Is Unnecessary » May 21st, 2018, 6:14 am

Art is art when there is someone to evaluate it. Someone may evaluate a hole on a piece of paper. Matter of interpretation.

Gertie
Posts: 594
Joined: January 7th, 2015, 7:09 am

Re: When Is Art, Art, And When Is Art, Nonsense.

Post by Gertie » July 23rd, 2018, 12:35 pm

They're both art. Under what criteria wouldn't they be?


And who cares, except people trying to monetarise people's creativity?

User avatar
ThomasHobbes
Posts: 1120
Joined: May 5th, 2018, 5:53 pm

Re: When Is Art, Art, And When Is Art, Nonsense.

Post by ThomasHobbes » July 23rd, 2018, 1:34 pm

TigerNinja wrote:
February 28th, 2018, 5:37 pm
(Forgive me, I still use bing)

Is this art: https://www.bing.com/images/search?view ... ajaxhist=0

YES

Is this art: https://www.bing.com/images/search?view ... ay&first=1

NOT AS MUCH.
If art is the emotionally expressive manipulation of materials to produce a physical representation of an image, then the first picture is art. If it is genuinely the work of a child then it is honest art, if an adult it is about deception.
The second image may not involve much human interaction, and it only art to the degree that a person is engaged in the creation of the image.

Spraticus
Posts: 132
Joined: January 29th, 2014, 6:43 pm

Re: When Is Art, Art, And When Is Art, Nonsense.

Post by Spraticus » July 28th, 2018, 1:36 pm

I would agree that the child's drawing is fine, if it's real. The second image could be regarded as art but it's trivial art.
Your definition of art, (a subject beaten to death at great length elsewhere) would exclude much conceptual art.

User avatar
ThomasHobbes
Posts: 1120
Joined: May 5th, 2018, 5:53 pm

Re: When Is Art, Art, And When Is Art, Nonsense.

Post by ThomasHobbes » July 28th, 2018, 3:06 pm

Spraticus wrote:
July 28th, 2018, 1:36 pm
I would agree that the child's drawing is fine, if it's real. The second image could be regarded as art but it's trivial art.
Your definition of art, (a subject beaten to death at great length elsewhere) would exclude much conceptual art.
I think its a good place to start as I value the actual labour of art. For me, art is more about the process than the goal. I enjoy making art, but once I've completed it, the object is something to gather dust.

Do you have an alternative definition?

Spraticus
Posts: 132
Joined: January 29th, 2014, 6:43 pm

Re: When Is Art, Art, And When Is Art, Nonsense.

Post by Spraticus » July 29th, 2018, 4:41 pm

I've never come up with, or seen a completely acceptable definition of art. Many people have tried but there is usually some problem. If you try to keep it brief and snappy you lose too much of the complexity, and if you include everything possible it becomes woolly or so hopelessly inclusive that everything becomes art.

Georgeanna
Posts: 313
Joined: October 29th, 2017, 1:17 pm

Re: When Is Art, Art, And When Is Art, Nonsense.

Post by Georgeanna » August 6th, 2018, 4:18 am

ThomasHobbes wrote:
July 28th, 2018, 3:06 pm
Spraticus wrote:
July 28th, 2018, 1:36 pm
I would agree that the child's drawing is fine, if it's real. The second image could be regarded as art but it's trivial art.
Your definition of art, (a subject beaten to death at great length elsewhere) would exclude much conceptual art.
I think its a good place to start as I value the actual labour of art. For me, art is more about the process than the goal. I enjoy making art, but once I've completed it, the object is something to gather dust.

Do you have an alternative definition?
I agree it is a subject beaten to death but what isn't in philosophy.
I have the view that art, like philosophy, is for all.
I see both as forms of learning, therapy and creativity involving the self exploring the world.
For some, there is an innate talent and the end product can be for sale or own pleasure. Sometimes you just gotta preserve a treasure and if that means framing or dusting, so be it.
Like anything, there is a scale or standard - the value of a product depends on context.

Spraticus
Posts: 132
Joined: January 29th, 2014, 6:43 pm

Re: When Is Art, Art, And When Is Art, Nonsense.

Post by Spraticus » August 6th, 2018, 4:37 pm

I would pretty much agree with that.

Georgeanna
Posts: 313
Joined: October 29th, 2017, 1:17 pm

Re: When Is Art, Art, And When Is Art, Nonsense.

Post by Georgeanna » August 7th, 2018, 4:19 am

Spraticus wrote:
August 6th, 2018, 4:37 pm
I would pretty much agree with that.
Thanks. Lovely to receive positive feedback.

User avatar
3uGH7D4MLj
Posts: 933
Joined: January 4th, 2013, 3:39 pm

Re: When Is Art, Art, And When Is Art, Nonsense.

Post by 3uGH7D4MLj » October 8th, 2018, 5:27 pm

TigerNinja wrote:
February 28th, 2018, 5:37 pm
Art, due to its abstract nature, is such an indefinable thing, and therefore, there is a clear position of relativity with what is art. Beauty (I'm making another topic, named "Is Art Beautiful?"), like art, is relative, therefore at what point does art lose its status as art. Personally, I believe that art doesn't exist to begin with. It is just a certain term that we apply to certain things on a canvas or wall that seem either pleasing to the senses or have vibrant colours with particular detail.
Art isn't an undefinable thing. It's a clear category of objects. No mystery. Everyone knows what art is. Ask that kid who drew that picture.
fair to say

User avatar
cavacava
New Trial Member
Posts: 10
Joined: October 12th, 2018, 11:10 am

Re: When Is Art, Art, And When Is Art, Nonsense.

Post by cavacava » October 14th, 2018, 12:32 pm

To me neither picture in the OP are art.

Art is defined in the Oxford Dictionary as "the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power."

The flower is not a human creation and I found neither beauty nor emotional power in the child's work.

Post Reply