What exactly do you consider "Art"?

[Harry Dresden]

All of them. 100%

the artist of yesteryear would laugh at no.3.....

 

[Disir]

Personally I'm of the mind that the word art has become meaningless.

When anyone can call themselves an artist and calls their latest piece of crap painting, graffiti, sculpture photo etc a work of art then we have jumped the shark

What is dadaism, dada art, or a dadaist? | Artland Magazine

Dadaism was a revolutionary movement in the early 20th century. Reacting against the challenges of modern age, Dada artists explored a form of “anti-art”

magazine.artland.com

I don't necessarily like the art of the period so much as I like the attitude in writing. I appreciate a lot of art but may not want that in my house. I dislike abstract paintings but equally dislike the rigidity found in other art.

I like Haitian steel drum art. I do not like the mass produced drum art.

I love sculptures. I don't want to own all of them. This one is fantastic:

Mad Mom - Meijer Gardens | Frederik Meijer Gardens & Sculpture Park

www.meijergardens.org

 

[Godboy]

Well I looked up two definitions and both used the terms "skill and creative imagination". So by that definition, I would say no. Your example definitely fails the first.

But many art people do not like still requires skill and creative imagination.

I think we have to rule out imagination as a requirement for art. There are people who paint what they see in front of them, which requires no imagination, just skill with a paint brush.

 

[1srelluc]

 

[SweetSue92]

Hmmm, "skill". I think thats a pretty good starting point at least. That would rule out shitting on a quran or bible as art. It does take some skill to make that offensive sign in the Die Hard movie though, so is IT art?

Some people won't like it, but I'm a conservative and therefore am usually pretty well reasoned, tend toward "words have meaning" and etc. But art is not to be strictly defined; that's what makes it art.

At any rate

I think a sign, using language and nothing else, really stretches the bound of "skill" and "creative imagination, so I would tend to say no to this. But I'm guessing my acceptance of what is "art" or not is much broader than many conservatives'.

 

[SweetSue92]

the artist of yesteryear would laugh at no.3.....

That just means you don't like it. That's valid. But it doesn't mean it's not art.

 

[SweetSue92]

What is dadaism, dada art, or a dadaist? | Artland Magazine

Dadaism was a revolutionary movement in the early 20th century. Reacting against the challenges of modern age, Dada artists explored a form of “anti-art”

magazine.artland.com

I don't necessarily like the art of the period so much as I like the attitude in writing. I appreciate a lot of art but may not want that in my house. I dislike abstract paintings but equally dislike the rigidity found in other art.

I like Haitian steel drum art. I do not like the mass produced drum art.

I love sculptures. I don't want to own all of them. This one is fantastic:

Mad Mom - Meijer Gardens | Frederik Meijer Gardens & Sculpture Park

www.meijergardens.org

Anyone who has had children has BEEN this mad mom at some point. heh

 

[Godboy]

Some people won't like it, but I'm a conservative and therefore am usually pretty well reasoned, tend toward "words have meaning" and etc. But art is not to be strictly defined; that's what makes it art.

At any rate

I think a sign, using language and nothing else, really stretches the bound of "skill" and "creative imagination, so I would tend to say no to this. But I'm guessing my acceptance of what is "art" or not is much broader than many conservatives'.

It absolutely stretches the bounds, but if there is a boundary, where is it? Thats the hard part. If you cant define the line where art stops being art, is it right to make it a requirement in the definition of art?

 

[Disir]

Anyone who has had children has BEEN this mad mom at some point. heh

Exactly.

 

[SweetSue92]

It absolutely stretches the bounds, but if there is a bound, where is it? If you cant define the line where art stops being art, its tough to define it as a requirement.

Yep. In my field, please enjoy John Cage, 4:33. Don't miss the quote at the beginning:

 

[Harry Dresden]

That just means you don't like it. That's valid. But it doesn't mean it's not art.

all no 3 is,is a bunch of brush strokes with different colors....you can call it art,raphael would have thought it was a panel were an artist was dabbing his brushes to see what the color looked like...

 

[Godboy]

Some people won't like it, but I'm a conservative and therefore am usually pretty well reasoned, tend toward "words have meaning" and etc. But art is not to be strictly defined; that's what makes it art.

At any rate

I think a sign, using language and nothing else, really stretches the bound of "skill" and "creative imagination, so I would tend to say no to this. But I'm guessing my acceptance of what is "art" or not is much broader than many conservatives'.

Im an atheist, so im also broader than most conservatives when it comes to acceptance. Hell, i even support the gays 100%, even though im super heterosexual and find gay shit absolutely disgusting. Live and let live.

 

[MarathonMike]

Art is one of the most difficult things to define. Take a look at the paintings of renowned artist Jackson Pollock as a perfect example.

 

[pknopp]

the artist of yesteryear would laugh at no.3.....

People of the time didn't buy Van Gogh's work.

 

[Harry Dresden]

People of the time didn't buy Van Gogh's work.

i didnt say the people....i said the artist of yesteryear....

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

What exactly do you consider "Art"?​

A scam

 

[pknopp]

i didnt say the people....i said the artist of yesteryear....

And I'm saying it would be irrelevant. The artists of yesteryear didn't think much of Van Gogh either.

 

[BothWings]

 

[Harry Dresden]

And I'm saying it would be irrelevant. The artists of yesteryear didn't think much of Van Gogh either.

really?.....Paul Gauguin and Toulouse-Lautrec thought highly of him so did an organization of artists and writers, known as Les Vingt.......Van Gogh was not a very popular guy around people hence why many ignored him.....but we all know how wrong they were....

 

[pknopp]

really?.....Paul Gauguin and Toulouse-Lautrec thought highly of him so did an organization of artists and writers, known as Les Vingt.......Van Gogh was not a very popular guy around people hence why many ignored him.....but we all know how wrong they were....

He wasn't a very likable guy. Artists of his time would have all starved if they had listened to him.