UnseenChaos
New Metal Member
- Sep 12, 2006
- 8
- 0
- 1
I doubt relieving yourself in the bathroom is art.UnseenChaos said:everything you do is a manifestation of art
AnvilSnake said:I doubt relieving yourself in the bathroom is art.
Silver Incubus said:What is art? Isn't it just a symbolic representation of the internal experessed externally?
Justin S. said:The problem here is that the above definition is so broad as to encompass nearly all human activity. If all is art, art is nothing. Certainly, even if one supports such a notion (everything is art), they cannot erase the connotations of such a word, nor the cultural prestige and multi-million dollar facilities housing something defined exclusively as "art" in contrast to its surroundings (which is bogus, but not because everything is art).
Trying to pin down a definition of art in terms of physical objects is a hopeless pursuit (goes to limits). As I have mentioned, the relationship of the agents involved must be explored more thoroughly.
Silver Incubus said:I don't understand why you think that it is a general statement.
Silver Incubus said:There are, what I thought later to add but didn't, different levels of skill that pertains to art. IN a way, learning to express your internal world better or more skillfully then others. What we do, when we put on displays, is show people who are either very skilled or very unique in their ideas or perception at communicating that internal world with other people in the external. So fields like liturature workds this way, where one writing and choosing a unique combination of words, motifs and other techniques to create a compelling story. Whereas junk liturature are just easily written stories that provide the sense of escape without the artful construction of words and phrases. The same goes for music. The level of thought that may go throught the pop songs structure and harmonics are very basic and pander to those without any sense of the art, the lyrics may or may not be art in this situation and are most likely the latter. Then on the other extreme of the spectrum you have free jazz, which could be considered stream of conscouisness playing at times. Good chefs are artists they take the imagined tastes of what they know and construct flavor combinations that most people couldn't just imagine and create.
Justin S. said:I fail to see how, even if modified, the claim, "symbolic representationof the internal expressed externally" is not extremely general. How is this conception of art different from any other human activity involving a projected symbolic realm (language, architecture, ritual, tool making, metaphysics, etc.). What then distinguishes "art" from other modes of activity? This is what I meant by, "if all is art, art is nothing". Have I misunderstood you?
Now you introduce "skill" in relation to "art" (although, what the relation is, is not clear from your post). You seem to suggest that art is, at least in part, a demonstration of skill (both acquired and innately disposed). If we talk about "innate" skill, then we stare at chance or charisma, neither of which are choices of the subject. If acquired, then its a matter of knowledge and habituation. Art by this understanding is mere permutation, a thing. Skill cannot be art, but merely a component. The essential relationship is still missing from the above elaboration.