Define ART.
- Thread starter Hell Mike
- Start date
IOfTheStorm
Gogol Bordello
Oh shut up all of you, trying to define something so abstract. Art, as a term and category, is overrated
Demonspell
cheating the polygraph
Art is the imagination manifested in physical form. Art is the process by which the intangible is translated into the visual and auditory. The purpose of art is known only in the mind of its executor.
Ellestin
one-click buy
Sadguru
In my dream...
Ellestin
one-click buy
IOfTheStorm said:
Overemployed you mean. I agree with demonspell's definition. "Art" is pretty much a concept-tinged extension of "craft" in fact.
Sadguru
In my dream...
Demonspell said:
I don't think the executor see a purpose in his work [other than the art itself], and that's the very beauty of it. To me, art is the end, not the mean.
IOfTheStorm
Gogol Bordello
No, overrated. It doesnt matter if something is called "art", though most people care about this only. So whats the big deal if you call your music/sculpture/painting/whatever "art" , art is just a word.Ellestin said:
Ellestin
one-click buy
IOfTheStorm said:
Well you know, calling something "art" does not make it any better than what it is, maybe some people beg to differ. As you say it's just a word, but being "just" a word it answers to a definition of sorts nonetheless, this definition being that there's no definition per se - although Demonspell's one fits with me
spaffe
Geisterglut
Materially speaking, I think all things truly made and crafted by humans (ie not soul-less mass produced items) can be considered art (and hence, on a side note, art is on the wane nowadays). Though I can't think of any more abstract definition in terms of subjective experience :|
Erik
New Metal Member
So could something generated by a computer never be art, for instance? Just throwing out a question, not sure what I think yetspaffe said:
DE
vote bnp
Erik said:
I don't think so, no - if by "generated by a computer" you mean something entirely dynamic, not a human using Photoshop as a tool for example. I think imagination is a requirement for something to be classed as art, but that's just me.
spaffe
Geisterglut
Erik said:
Nah I'd say it can't; the piece/thing in question would, in the end, have to be put together or assembled (a word I'd say is the very opposite to art) by some machine which would make it sterile and soulless, so to speak; so I'd say no to that. Though "art" (in lack of a better word) made by humans by the means of a computer would have to be put in a grey zone of sorts - it's not as alive as physical (in a broad sense, including music) art but still not entirely soulless.
Erik
New Metal Member
spaffe, DE
So now consider the fact that a computer cannot do anything without having a program written for it by a human. Computer programming is art if you ask some, and even if a hypothetical "art generator" could create works that the programmer could never forsee the nature of, wouldn't the generated work be art by proxy of what the programmer created?
So now consider the fact that a computer cannot do anything without having a program written for it by a human. Computer programming is art if you ask some, and even if a hypothetical "art generator" could create works that the programmer could never forsee the nature of, wouldn't the generated work be art by proxy of what the programmer created?
Demonspell
cheating the polygraph
I see computers as being another facilitator for art, and I certainly don't look at digitally generated art and just see numbers and arbitrary patterns and no genuine inspiration...
spaffe
Geisterglut
Erik said:
Hm, I wouldn't consider computer programming an art, mainly because I think one important aspect of the definition of art is that it can be experienced and appreciated first of all in an emotional and direct manner; both the computer in itself and the complex nature of code in general prevent this.
In essence I belive an object/creation needs to have a clear "human nature" to it for it to strike me as art.
Erik
New Metal Member
To other programmers, a piece of program code made in a specifically elegant or clever manner can be considered art -- things like these, while intolerably geeky and incomprehensible to Joe Q Common, can certainly evoke emotions and appreciation and so forth in other programmers.
This is in no way different to how you have to be used to the genre to appreciate the art of extreme metal.
This is in no way different to how you have to be used to the genre to appreciate the art of extreme metal.
Nico
Onward!
I think graphic design, or computer-generated graphics (though human input) could be considered art. It can be very expressive, though even when it isn't, it can easily be considered simply another artistic medium.
Night Mare
Camberwell Carrot
Seconded, just look at Stephen O'Malley's work, absolute genius, it can hypnotise you if you spend any more than about 13 seconds looking at it. My business cards could also be considered art...
