Define art
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /lit/ - Literature
You are currently reading a thread in /lit/ - Literature
Define art
>>8289097
This board is for literature
fuck off
Expression of creativity
Skill in action.
>>8289102
>2016
>he still thinks literature isn't a method which can be applied to any medium
>hates on roger ebert
>roger ebert is the harold bloom of cinema
what are you even doing with your life m9
>>8289097
>I thought about those works of Art that had moved me most deeply. I found most of them had one thing in common: Through them I was able to learn more about the experiences, thoughts and feelings of other people. My empathy was engaged. I could use such lessons to apply to myself and my relationships with others. They could instruct me about life, love, disease and death, principles and morality, humor and tragedy. They might make my life more deep, full and rewarding.
>Not a bad definition, I thought. But I was unable to say how music or abstract art could perform those functions, and yet they were Art. Even narrative art didn't qualify, because I hardly look at paintings for their messages. It's not what it's about, but how it's about it. As Archibald MacLeish wrote: A poem should not mean, but be.
>I concluded without a definition that satisfied me. I had to be prepared to agree that gamers can have an experience that, for them, is Art. I don't know what they can learn about another human being that way, no matter how much they learn about Human Nature. I don't know if they can be inspired to transcend themselves. Perhaps they can. How can I say? I may be wrong. but if 'm not willing to play a video game to find that out, I should say so. I have books to read and movies to see. I was a fool for mentioning video games in the first place.
tl;dr he already gave up on his vidya shit a long time ago and if you bring it up you're a butthurt neckbeard
>>8289121
>not flappy hands kermode
>>8289097
Aesthetic expression.
>>8289097
define "define"
>>8289130
>>I thought about those works of Art that had moved me most deeply. I found most of them had one thing in common: Through them I was able to learn more about the experiences, thoughts and feelings of other people. My empathy was engaged. I could use such lessons to apply to myself and my relationships with others. They could instruct me about life, love, disease and death, principles and morality, humor and tragedy. They might make my life more deep, full and rewarding.
this is it right here
>>8289152
Something that pleases the soul. Putting that which is in the mind out into the world.
>>8289097
It's always good and never bad.
>>8289158
what is the soul?
Any attempt at communication that contains aesthetic ideals.
>>8289097
The fine arts.
>>8289179
what if the attempt failed?
>>8289169
The thing that experiences. Brain, whatever.
>>8289097
My Ass!
>>8289220
wishing someone congratulations confirmed for art
Everything is art. Art has no rules. Which is why art is meaningless
>>8289097
Expressing conceptual moral truths and values in a sensible and intuitive form. Anything else is masturbation. True art is about good and evil, life and death.
>>8289152
>so if someone answered a riddle correctly that would be art
No. It doesn't take true creativity to answer a riddle because someone else already thought about the answer, in this case it's the guy who thought about the riddle.
a non-pleb way to express pleb feelings.
>>8289298
How does that definition encompass music? How can a composition express a moral truth?
>inb4 music is masturbation
>>8289325
Why? Music can make you love certain things, good or bad. Music makes you feel things, make you want things, and do things.
There really is no such thing as Art. There are only artists.
>>8289339
>logic101 not even once
art is the way human beings communicate. a superior way of language. those who cannot create it and only 'appreciate' it are incomplete human beings.
>>8289347
I define "art" by its Latin root, meaning "skill," there is no disembodied skill.
The knowledge or skill by which to make or do things.
From the Latin 'ars', 'craft'.
making useless things or adorning useful things with useless things
to reduce art to skill and communication (albeit a superior one) is piss-poor thinking
>>8289462
t. uneducated randie
>>8289462
>he thinks the communicative aspect of communication is what communication is about
http://aynrandlexicon.com/lexicon/art.html
Done.
The quality of communication.
>>8289097
Art is the manifestation of a subjective truth.
>>8289108
That's technique, dear.
>>8289130
/v/ has control issues, the post.
>>8289285
>admitting your own post is meaningless
Why demean yourself, anon?
You can't, you won't, you shouldn't. If you point me to someone who has I can point you someone equally qualified who has said something in contradiction of it.
I actually cant because I dont have time for that but you will have to trust or already know im telling the truth. Point is I personally wouldnt trust anyone who tried to define art unless they were just doing it for the sake of discussion. As in "lets say that art is X" and there is a common agreement between people discussing.
>>8289496
>qualified
You can't even define what those qualifications are.
>>8289496
What is your problem? Why wouldn't people be able to know the use of the word they invented?
>>8289506
I can point to what the qualifications are for someone to speak on what makes art, what do you mean. Philosophers, art historians, any one of these people most would say is qualified to speak about what art is.
>>8289097
the visualization of will
This is mental masturbation. You should be reading. I should be reading.
>>8289522
*materialization
>>8289517
How many words and phrases that people invented can you think of that we can't accurately define and struggle to every day. I didnt say you cant I said you shouldnt, my personal opinion. You could say something basic but OP is just going to keep trying to deduce it further till you get into a discussion no one wants to have probably and has 100 times over.
>>8289520
What are the qualifications for a "philosopher"?
kek.
You gotta be able to think these things through, buddy.
>>8289537
Example by the way in case you truly cant think of any. "Love", "Happiness", the concept of "The meaning of life". All human invented words and phrases
>>8289526
visualization is art within the brain. selfish, i know, but I'm not into capitalism.
>>8289548
All I was saying is that if YOU think someone is qualified to speak about art and you point me to his definition, I can point you to someone with the SAME qualificafions. I never said I think anyone is qualified, my post was nearly saying the opposite but not quite.
>>8289560
>qualifications are relative
Thanks for admitting your post is meaningless.
>>8289550
all words and phrases are invented by humans
hardly revelatory.
lol fuck her, I don't even care anymore--all women are whores--someone give me a goddamn high-five
>>8289493
I demean because Im demented
>>8289598
and not creative.
>>8289601
>being the arbiter of creativity
>>8289486
Art and Technique go together like skin and bone.
>>8289610
thanks for admitting I'm right
>>8289614
I never said you were wrong, but I think we can both agree that art is hardly worth taking seriously if it isnt done with skill.
>>8289607
>having no defense
I don't blame you.
Art is a selective re-creation of reality according to an artist’s metaphysical value-judgments.
The purpose of art is to communicate truths about reality and of existence. Art isolates and integrates those aspects of reality which represent man’s fundamental view of himself and of existence. The worst thing art can do is nothing. To experience something, wasting your time and obtaining no emotional reaction.
>>8289616
I know I'm right. Thanks for agreeing.
Accepting a thank you is basic manners.
>>8289631
Blameless
>>8289635
A bit too eager there, lad. What happened to just having a discussion?
>>8289632
>communicate "truths"
The most meaningless, nebulous definition possible.
For example, that means every fiction novel is unartistic. lol
>>8289644
Sorry, I didn't mean to get you off track.
I have no way of pre-gauging your sensitivity, but now that I know, we can carry on.
>>8289655
>>8289679
Is inner dialogue artistic?
>>8289648
>For example, that means every fiction novel is unartistic. lol
Argh, this argument is old and boring. Every fictional novel is not a direct recreation of life, therefore it's unartistic, correct? Only non-fiction can be artistic?
Moore had a good description which I liked. Every story is fictional, but so long as the emotions are true and is reflective of the real world, it is accepted. What matters are emotions. This is why the quality of art is reflected on how much emotion is can give its audience.
If a story happens where everyone acts like complete robots, act contradictory to the real world without a coherent example, then it becomes unrealistic and unartistic, as it does not reflect the existence.
This is why 're-creation of reality' is important. It's not the fact that it is fictional that does not make it art.
Scribbles about nothing that give no emotional reaction is not art.
>>8289689
That's why art is defined as, "the quality of communication."
>>8289570
My post was saying you can't define art accurately, I dont see how you arguing about the semantics of qualifications changes anything about my post. Unless you are saying what I think you are and I really hope you aren't.
>>8289577
Apparently it is because a certain someone was saying "how can art not be defined if we made it".
I may have been wrong in my original post, im not necessarily saying you shouldnt define art, you certainly shouldnt in this thread though. There is definitions of art in the dictionary, and we can probably agree on things like it consists of creativity and self expression. But I can already tell, OP or someone (i see them replying in this thread) is going to lead this to a very shitty discussion of something not entirely related to art at all.
And id like to point out there isnt anything wrong with broad definitions. Thats all I really have to say here anymore.
>>8289696
Thanks for stopping by (and running away from the conversation).
>>8289688
Does it give you an emotional reaction or tell you a value about existence?
If yes, then it's art.
If no, then it isn't art.
>>8289694
I dunno about the quality of communication. Some art can be great while being hard to communicate its truths and values. Perhaps the quality of what is being communicated rather than the quality of the communication?
For example, Finnegans Wake is extremely hard to understand and is impossible to understand what it is trying to communicate. Can it be considered art?
Ayn Rand hated Joyce because she didn't consider tweaking other languages as being art but I don't agree. Her own definiton, that of recreating value judgement of reality, applies.
The quality of communication doesn't tell anything about art or its relation to existence.
>>8289717
I think you need a sense of humor.
To assume that art must be taken seriously means you won't achieve a full understanding of what it can encompass.
>>8289706
I will be in a few minutes because I said what I wanted to say and I cant fucking sit in this thread forever. Im taking a shit right now, a really long one so I have time to spare. Il send you pics when im finished if you want proof
>>8289717
Why does art have to give you an emotional reaction or a value about existence? Could you not create a style of art that denied these two axioms?
>inb4 ur not creative
>>8289724
I don't think anything should be taken seriously.
Why do you think I take art seriously?
>>8289725
I understand that you don't like the discomfort of challenging your own preconceptions.
It's not uncommon, but it can result in psychosomatic constipation.
>>8289732
What are you saying, did you read my post
"I may have been wrong in my original post"
Im honestly pretty sure your just fucking with me right now, because I said thats all I have to say. So your trying to prove that wasnt all I had to say or something
>>8289729
I don't think about you that much.
Thanks for agreeing that you do need, whether or not you currently have, a sense of humor.
>>8289728
>Why does art have to give you an emotional reaction or a value about existence
Would you watch a show or a movie where you felt nothing, didn't care about the characters and learned nothing?
I'm not talking about Seinfeld of 'it's a show about nothing' but something where nothing of importance was gained.
>Could you not create a style of art that denied these two axioms?
I dunno, can you?
The closest I can think of is some postmodern art where you do not fully get emotionally invested or gain anything, as it is obscured, but it doesn't mean that it isn't there.
Even >>8289462 gives a message about existence, even if it doesn't give an emotional reaction.
>>8289736
If you want all your posts to be identified, use a trip my friend, or another website that may be more suitable to your needs.
>>8289740
emotion is everything. thought comes from emotion. it's not a separate entity, but us humans do try. art reminds us that thought and emotion are connected. we witness art, we experience an immediate shift in our emotional state and this invites us to think differently from our previous perspective.
>>8289740
Its questionable at best if the Dada school has any sort of value towards existence. The point could be made that by devaluing existence they are putting forth an answer for the meaning of existence, so in a roundabout way the Dada introduce a truth that would then have value towards existence. Funnily enough though the Dadaist(who dont unironically exist anymore, if they ever did exist unironically) would have to deny even the value that this truth of no value would have, in order to stay consistent.
So I would say yes, I believe the nihilists when they say there is no meaning to their art.
>>8289752
That's not the purpose of being anonymous.
You don't get this website at all.
We chase disembodied ideas, not whom said what.
You want credit: 1. trip 2. go somewhere else.
Artist here. Any questions?
>>8289757
belief and truth are polar opposites.
>>8289762
why?
>>8289757
dada, the post
>>8289775
Good question.
>>8289121
>Ebert
I was overjoyed when I heard on /tv/ that this charlatan had finally died, but I was also saddened by the fact that he hadn't suffered that much before deciding that he could insult film criticism no longer. The pain and suffering that he went through is only a fraction of the evil that he inflicted on the millions of cinematically illiterate teenagers. When I found out that the old fart had finally decided to not assault the public with his adolescent approach to art, I pulled off the framed picture of Armond White from my wall, kissed it reverently, and immediately embarked on a Korine marathon. Good riddance, you jawless hack.
>>8289780
I know! Almost artistic in its apparent simplicity.
>>8289784
/v/ doesn't appreciate freedom of speech
>>8289760
And then people accuse you of samefagging when you dont make it obvious you are the same person. So you trying to say I shouldnt represent myself vs others saying I should. Honestly I think your probably right but if I didnt why would your viewpoint be any better. Ive been here probably as long as you and have seen people follow this conversation style of posting despite being anonymous countless times.
>>8289803
I'm sorry that's it's hard for you.
Nobody promised that anything would be easy.
>>8289803
BIVE TONGUE TO MU BACKSIDE
>>8289740
> learned nothing
Are you that Leavisite faggot from the Austen thread? Art isn't about learning something, it's about having experiences. Pleasure, you know?
>>8289808
Some know 4chan better, some art.
>>8289827
yes, not necessarily "pleasure," though. discomfort is allowed under the same umbrella of experience.
>>8289767
Isn't truth a form of belief?
I mean, as all knowledge is based on correlation of informations (therefore truth [which is processed information, filtered by knowledge based on previous truth, which renders this truth on a completely biased base, making truth completely subjective] is knowledge that is believed in), that a truth has to be believed in
>>8289829
and some both.
>>8289840
I guess, but you don't.
>>8289784
>I pulled off the framed picture of Armond White from my wall, kissed it reverently, and immediately embarked on a Korine marathon.
I'm so sorry for you
>>8289827
So you're saying art that teaches you experience isn't qualified as 'learning'?
>>8289836
beliefs are lies. they don't even exist.
That's why all beliefs are destructive. They limit thought, thereby shielding one from what they are experiencing now. For example, this is the basis of why some attempt to ban art--because it challenges to annihilate their "beliefs."
All beliefs are lies. All beliefs involve fear. All beliefs are afraid to be lost by the beholder.
>>8289836
Truth is the processed one by knowledge? What if knowledge is processed by truth?
>>8289858
Art reinforces beliefs more than challenges them, which is what makes challenging art memorable. What is this issue with belief? Half of what you said is plain false and overstatement
>>8289097
>Define art
he did most of the singing, but paul wrote all of the songs
>>8289884
Only if you look for the art that you think agrees with you, which means that you're a simpleton.
>>8289893
I thought this was the "happy tree" guy, for a moment.
>>8289858
But if you don't believe anything, then you don't know anything. I think our definitions of belief are differing. What I mean by belief is that even if you know something, you have to believe it to know it
For example: X knows that Y is A. P says that Y is B. X doesn't believe P since he believes that he knows that Y is A. X cannot point out his knowledge of his truth, for he can only believe his knowledge, which is true to him.
I'm sorry, I'm a filthy relativist
>>8289867
The only absolute truth is that something is, after that everything is knowledge and truths formed on that knowledge
>>8289893
Nice
>>8289855
Art doesn't 'teach you' experience. Art gives you experiences.
>>8289933
Knowledge doesn't require belief. It just requires rote memorization.
>>8289753
I don't entirely agree. Some art can give no emotional reaction while giving us insight into existence. It's simply that emotional gain is valued more than thoughts or ideas.
>>8289943
A person's first profound experience with art actually teaches them what true experience is all about.
>>8289833
No, it's all pleasure. The fake discomfort of challenging art that bourgeois people use as hardship methadone is just a particularly refined, decadent kind of pleasure.
>>8289943
Alright, fine, art gives you experience and you learn more about life.
Happy?
>>8289952
Art doesn't give emotion. It engenders.
Indifference is an emotional response, too.
>>8289954
That sounds good, but failed in its artistic rendering to me, and I suppose to many others as well.
>>8289944
>knowledge is technique
>>8289953
No, their senses teach them what 'real experience' is all about. A person's first profound experience with art introduces them to a more sophisticated grade of pleasure. Nothing didactic happens there.
>>8289957
How is indifference an emotional response?
How is staring at a blank white canvas, giving me total indifference, an emotional response?
>>8289968
knowledge is static
technique requires motion.
>>8289970
That's not an example because you're describing something that is not an artistic piece.
Try again, please.
>>8289973
Then how can you memorize?
>>8289969
>only artistic experiences are profound
nice argument, buddy.
ITT: Everyone is arguing their own terms without even defining them
>>8289955
No, art gives you experiences and you can conclude from them how the artist sees life. You only learn about the reality of life, and how it differs from everyone's opinion, by living it.
>>8289978
You don't know how to memorize?
>backs away slowly...
>>8289979
No, I never said anything remotely like that, in fact I'm practically saying the reverse of that. 'First profound' implies that previous experiences of art had been less profound. That is what I am talking about when I say 'introduction to a higher grace of pleasure'.
>>8289983
>art gives you experiences and you can conclude from them how the artist sees life.
So basically, it's still
>Art is a selective re-creation of reality according to an artist’s metaphysical value-judgments.
We're basically agreeing on the same thing but arguing on semantics.
>>8289988
I'm asking you how you can memorize without motion, meme man. Are you traumatized or something?
>>8289983
Not all art pieces are esoteric representations of how exalted artists view this thing we call life.
Some of them are lies. Obviously, too, if an artist is hired, they are representing someone else's ideas, not their own.
>>8289933
I like it, Heideggerian. Have you ever wondered if meaning is tied in the same fundamental way that being is? How can you make statements about meaning/being, without assuming a meaning/being?
In our discussion it would translate that the only absolute truths are that some thing is, and if my wonderings are correct, and that meanings have values.
Just a thought, Im not really tied to it
>>8289992
Not all encounters with art are profound. Some go over the head. Especially early on in life.
>>8289996
Different poster. In fact, that description is faulty, but I wouldn't have had the same discussion about it.
>>8290011
>that description is faulty
What's faulty about that description?
>>8290011
>still trying to maintain identity without using a trip
Some people are so stupid.
It could also be laziness. I should be fair.
>>8289996
>semantics
Totally irrelevant to a site dedicated to literature which is entirely composed of words.
>>8290002
You're picking up on an irrelevance - my point is that art is not in any sense a way of learning about life.
>>8290020
Perhaps but I find splitting hairs to be not worth it.
>>8290015
It presupposes - typically, if the source is Rand - the possibility of a totalising perspective on reality which precedes the work of selection. The artist sees reality, in full, then selects bits. This isn't accurate.
>>8289850
Don't be.
>>8290027
That's why you will never be a great literary artiste.
>>8290040
I'm not so concerned with who said what, myself.
I can understand other people's concepts, hold my own and articulate myself in threads without obsessively having to refer readers back to multiple posts.
I can constantly move forward, rarely having to spin my wheels--which is normally done out of common courtesy, so you can catch up.
>>8290026
Art is a part of life. It is not separate.
You sound stupid.
>>8290035
>The artist sees reality, in full, then selects bits. This isn't accurate.
It isn't? Doesn't an artist experience life and create art based on their view and experience for others to enjoy?
Perhaps an artist doesn't see all of reality, in full or totality, but molds concepts of their view and value of existence to be molded into art?
>>8290048
Well I don't seek to become an artist, so being haphazard is close enough for me.
>>8290035
>The artist sees reality, in full, then selects bits.
You obviously have no experience being an artist.
Artists are not Gods that create their conceptions beforehand and simply put them into being via the medium that their talent prescribes. A lot of it is done, uncertainly, in the dark. You're just afraid of being afraid.
>>8290066
That's good, because you obviously don't have the talent to be one.
It's good not to waste your time.
>>8290055
Why are giant asses invoking basic manners and common curtesy so much? Anon, you might have learned them wrong to begin with.
>>8290081
Obviously. I'm too mellow to create anything.
>>8290091
"pothead" is shorter to write
you're welcome
>>8290087
courtesy
>>8290071
I was summarising her position, as the sentences before and after that one make clear.
>>8290066
> Perhaps an artist doesn't see all of reality, in full or totality
That's right, the thing I was actually saying, you agree with.
>>8290154
going for the bait and ignoring the questions, so predictable
>>8290174
>unpredictability is always good
Rote beliefs always stunt you're intellectual growth.
>>8290182
Why can't you explain how knowledge is static?
>>8290188
These "facts" really contribute to the subject at head.
If you are so attention-hungry, create a trip or at least go somewhere else.
>>8290168
It wouldn't have been neccesary if you had read the sentences in question.
>>8290189
The knowledge I have doesn't go anywhere. It can only be added to or disappear.
>>8290188
No, you read what you were responding to too hastily, then agreed with what I was saying. If you could keep your mind on the discussion rather than keep looking for opportunities to assert your self-image, you wouldn't keep tripping yourself up.
>>8290199
>The knowledge I have doesn't go anywhere
finally
>>8290192
They were so inartistically presented that's why they probably failed to have much impact.
>>8290211
It feels good to be desired.
Thanks anon.
>>8290213
I'm not interested in this tit-for-tat thing you've got going on with the other anon. If you want to address my criticism of that description of art, do it, if not, don't bother with this kind of reply, I'm not that desperate for something to do.
>>8290221
If you want to ascribe your identity to your posts, use a trip, otherwise get out.
It's not that complicated.
I can restate my positions many times, because I don't require everyone to accept one perspective. I can adjust accordingly. Can you?
>>8289944
Yes, you are correct, but what you memorize is what you believe, or to put it another way, you need to believe what you memorize.
>>8290006
I've never read Heidegger, I'm pretty much a pleb on lit/phil, so I can't say anything about his stuff
Meaning is constructed to all things after they are established. Meaning cannot predate unconciously created beings, but meaning can predate conciously created beings, such as tools, children and ministrys. I don't therefore think that being/meaning are tied together, but are often found and applied together.
Statements of meaning and being are made after meaning is established. Things that are, but aren't meant (or better said haven't been established to have meaning) can only be filled with meaning and afterwards regular statements can be made.
>meanings have values
this I don't understand, help me out?
>>8289097
It's really not worth it. It's way more interesting and even possible to try and define high art, though.
>>8290245
I wasn't a part of that conversation.
If you want more control about who responds to you and who doesn't, go somewhere else.
>>8290257
Nope. I can memorize "I am dead" without believing it.
>>8290264
You responded to that conversation.
>>8290259
Then why don't you try to do it?
>>8290287
Yes, to a different post.
I don't have to view the history. Iunfortunatelyassume the previous ideas have been absorbed and the conversation is moving forward. I will not take on your conversational faults.
I never have to refer an anon back to my previous posts. I can regroup, restate myself, adjusting my thinking and move forward.
Try to stay on your toes, anon.
>>8289689
>a story happens where everyone acts like complete robots
With all honesty i would watch something like that, it sounds lik some weird art-house thing.
>>8290307
Again, I'm not interested in the tit-for-tat thing, so as the other anon appears to have left, this is over.
It is pointless to define art imho. And given definitions, about art being something more related to emotions is rather scary. Emotions usally blur clear mind judgement and common sense. I will admit it does sound scary to me.
>>8290322
There's still conversation happening.
Maybe you have too many filters.
>>8290327
It is scary. I promise it won't cause physical damage, though.
You will find rewards if you try scary artistic experiences.
>>8290346
By that you mean i beleive horror, gore, violence and related things?
>>8290360
Viewing it? I'm sure you already have via the internet.
>>8290369
Apologies, you lost me. I do not understand what exactly you meant by
"You will find rewards if you try scary artistic experiences."
Is it related to horror genre? or was it supposed to mean something else that went over my head?
>>8290257
I was operating on meaning as expression and possibility, that it is similar to a variable assignment. Meaning is the assignment of value, it has values. I might be using meaning a little loosely, more akin to valuing. Relative valuation, between being. That being and assignment of value, what ive just been calling meaning, are presupposed in any statement or metaphysics.
>>8290395
Just use whatever you meant by it. My statement will be appropriate with that definition.
>>8290417
This is not related to art.
>>8289097
art is a expression of emotions and ideas through a medium like paint or music. it can also include film ,tv and even video games
but this can also include the work of some one in a non traditional form. a serial killer may display his victims as a piece of art like jack the ripper
>>8290421
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cQcE4_7-X78
>>8290449
On, /lit/, we use words. Try again.
>>8290437
You're trying to romanticize the creation of art.
An art piece elicits emotion and does not esoterically hold the author's intention.
Any real artist will tell you that complete understanding between you and them via their art is an impossibility.
>>8290462
I was going to write a wall of insulting text which was going to express extreme form of anger mixed with some hatred confusion and little form of sadness, with lots of insults, slurs, ad hominem, pointless and baseless vulgar words attacking you and blabbing how i despise this board with its mostly over pretentious population, even though i know not all of it is like that and in fact it is wrong to generalize people, or insult them even if they fit the description i depicted above. It was baseless argument anyways, i was just going to try to insult you and let off steam as hard as i can, trying to irritate you in the process aswell.
But now i decide it is inappropriate behaviour and i better would not act like that, this being said i still want to let you know i do not appriciate this, how should i put it.. dodgy? smarty (if it's even a word)? smart-assish behaviour and answers. It rather feels soulless, pretentious even (but perhaps i am cutting it too far).
Anyway. How are you?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YbjzHDBnaxI
>>8290539
Thank you for describing what you were going to do but didn't. I didn't even have to read it, since the point of it is insubstantial. Thanks!
>>8289784
This pasta doesn't even make sense. Armond hates Korine whereas Ebert was one of the few critics to give Julian Donkey-Boy a positive review.
>>8290566
You're welcome. But still read it there's some point in the second part of it.
art is whatever the art world says it is, dependent on its own discrimination. currently art history favours a pluralist way of looking at art i.e. it's social, historical, and theoretical contexts. there's not really one single way to define all art throughout history and across cultures. 'expression' has never really been a concern of the arts and neither has 'communication' -- at least not on part of the artist. much of western art for example have just been attempts at solving problems for patrons and in the renaissance art was primarily a business
>>8290583
You can like both Korine and Armond.
>>8290593
Then the presentation is horrible. You should learn from it.
>>8290595
You don't have to "be in the art world"--assuming you mean artists and its connoisseurs--to state what art is. Anyone one, no matter their qualifications, can state a solid opinion about art.
I once stated that an album was so pathetic that it was not an art piece, but a therapy session and the artists was confused about the difference. One person got very mad at me and stalked me on the internet for a time. It was hilarious, flattering and pathetic.
>>8290230
Yes, please restate your positions, anon. Thanks!
>>8290609
I will in response to an on-going conversation, a direct question or if I feel like starting anew.
>>8290608
anyone can say something is art without it actually being art
>>8290618
Yes, people have free will over their mouths, unless some physical impediment exists. Great point!
>>8290622
soooooooooooooo the definition of art isn't just "what anyone says it is" you big dummy
>>8290633
What makes your definition of art more valid than anyone else's?
>>8290636
i don't have a definition of art because i'm not a part of the art world
>>8290643
you wish
>>8289097
manipulation of beauty
>>8290648
i did explicitly state there is no real one definition of art initially
>>8290633
defining the word art, which is the basic discussion, is the focus
your emphasis is more on the "is this art?" "is that art?" approach, which is haphazard.
>>8290653
I'll remember that next time we talk. I'll look forward to chatting with you again as our personal relationship builds and grows in the future.
>>8290653
I meant about the art world part.
>>8290655
it isn't
>>8290668
I accept that you have no approach, as any response will lack any actual ideas or hint of any potential intellect.
>>8290690
alright sorry i mean art is aesthetic communicative expressionfaggot
>>8290701
I feel vindication.
>>8290711
are you still trying to get me to talk to you about art since i'm the only person who demonstrated any art historical knowledge in this thread?
>>8290650
Can art be intentionally ugly?
A series of electrical signals in the brain.
>>8290721
Art doesn't intend anything. It is not alive.
>>8290599
I am at intermediate level english, one day i hope to become advanced and fluent.
>>8290719
Are you attention starved? Why don't you go create some art, take a picture, post it here and we'll all look at it for you. Sound like a plan?
Outflow of the feelings and desires of mankind purposefully done for masturbation
>>8290731
WHY DON'T YOU GO... J-JERK OFF, YOU LOSER
>>8290747
We took a vote and all-caps is not art.
>>8290722
this
>>8290809
A piece of art exists outside the brain. An art piece can exist without it being experienced.
At the very least, you can trip over it.
A work of art in the classificatory sense is 1) an artifact 2) on which some person or persons acting on behalf of a certain social institution (the artworld) has conferred the status of candidate for appreciation.
/thread
Yes, I can /thread myself.
>>8290860
>>8290952
>the old everything is believed in, everything is everything "mindset"
boring.
>>8290876
That makes it "classy."
>>8290976
I think you mean conservative.
>>8290993
I like to try to make those two words interchangeable.
Is there something wrong with that?smiley-winky face
>>8290974
>The old implying anti-thought cynicism, completely witless "mindset"
just
>>8291019
well-memed
Perception, classification.
>>8291086
What is a bailiff?
>>8291076
Indeed :--)
Art is the things that I consider enjoyable and which I consider having artistic merit
>>8291133
>art = valid entertainment
I don't think "nice" is a legitimate qualifier.
>>8289097
It's what we use when we don't wanna use language
>>8289717
my life gives me emotional reaction, is it art?
>>8291149
>there is no art to language
>>8291253
yes, and to further this point, being butt raped is art because we assume it will produce an emotional reaction
>>8289097
>define art
>some faggot makes something outside of your definition and calls it art
>rethink definition
>repeat
>>8291278
never experienced this
all art is within my definition
