Art as definition and statement
John Jones
This is not a definition of art because the statement does not present art.
Art is not a definable proposition.
JJ
Miller
"John Jones" <jivers...@btopenworld.com> wrote in message
news:c1ov3v$5ck$2...@sparta.btinternet.com...
So you define art as a proposition that is not definable?
Scott
Chzwmn
>>
>> JJ
>>
>
>So you define art as a proposition that is not definable?
>
>Scott
>
Art is a tricky one. Trouble is, it is artists who define it. Politicians might
be liars but they know what they are doing. Artists on the other hand are
slippery customers and its not just what kind of art they do but the very fact
that they do different art tends to extend and change the boundaries. Some
artists would say that Leonardo was not an artist as such or at least, much of
what he did was not art...
Miller
"Chzwmn" <chz...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:20040228110643...@mb-m26.aol.com...
There is the person who interprets what we call art also. Is it still art
if no one ever attempts to make something out of it (other than the artist)?
Scott
Chzwmn
>There is the person who interprets what we call art also. Is it still art
>if no one ever attempts to make something out of it (other than the artist)?
>
>Scott
I think it probably fails the art test if no one is interested enough to "make
somthing of it".
Personally I cherish craft. One can tell the difference when a piece of art has
been the recipient of a full on engagement with the artist. That care,
attention and emotional force have been put into the work.
Contrast a bi-coloured canvas by say Rothko, and a finely painted work by
Rosetti.
addiss
<jivers...@btopenworld.com> writes
Art is old hat, art lives here.
addiss
Miller
OK. What about it?
Scott
Chzwmn
>Path:
>lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!nntp1.roc.gblx.net!nntp.g
blx.net!nntp.gblx.net!tdsnet-transit!newspeer.tds.net!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-01!
sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail
>From: "Miller" chumley70...@chartermi.net
>Newsgroups: alt.philosophy
>Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 10:59:03 -0500
>Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
>Message-ID: <104431p...@corp.supernews.com>
>References: <1041vvk...@corp.supernews.com>
><20040229083024...@mb-m23.aol.com>
>X-Priority: 3
>X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
>X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
>X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
>X-Complaints-To: ab...@supernews.com
>Lines: 26
CW
Miller
You said to contrast Rothko with Rosetti,as if it had something to do with
artistic "full engagement" and all. What about it?
Scott
Chzwmn
an entire exhibition by Rothko!
How about you?
Miller
I think that reflects your taste in art, and while there is no accounting
for taste, I think by that same token we must give other's opinions of what
is and is not art some respect as well. That inlcudes artists. Who am I to
say that Eminem is a talentless hack while Bach was a genious? Just my
expression of my taste in music, and that's all. I would not want to make
sweeping statements, however on what is and is not music, or what is or is
not craft, or which artist is fully engaged or whatnot.
Scott
John Jones
JJ
Miller <chumley70...@chartermi.net> wrote in message
news:10418k7...@corp.supernews.com...
Chzwmn
I'm not sure how sweeping it is, but I do think that there are standards you
can apply. Craft is one of them. There is more craft in a Rosetti than in a
Rothko. Just like there is more technology in a modern Ferarri than in a modelT
Ford, or more cream in an eclair than in a sticky bun. I can tell this with
reasonable certainty, as, having done some art myself, I can reproduce a Rothko
in 20 mins, but a Rosetti I still have to long way to go to understand how he
used paint. I am not saying that rothko is not art whilst Rossetti is: what I
am saying is that for me, craft is one of MY criteria upon which I base my
love of art..
And I prefer Bach to Eminen too. Enimen is a white boy black-wanabe and I don't
like being preached at about life on the street.
Tabula Rasa
elicit an emotional response from an individual than that artist is
doing something right, no matter the type or intensity.
> And I prefer Bach to Eminen too. Enimen is a white boy black-wanabe
and I don't
> like being preached at about life on the street.
In this instance, the artist in question elicited a semi-angry
response (as is the case with Eminem), thus creating an account of
that person in your mind. Even though you may not like him, you know
his name, what style of music he sings, and what he sings about. And
because of that, he is famous. He is an artist.
That is the beauty of art. While it may be created with but one
meaning in mind, with each new perceptual encounter that meaning
changes.
So what is the definition of art? Art is the random usage of our
sensory perceptions to incite various thought and emotion. Yes,
that's broad, but with our clumsy language it's the best I could do
8)
Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
----------------------------------------------------------
** SPEED ** RETENTION ** COMPLETION ** ANONYMITY **
----------------------------------------------------------
http://www.usenet.com
Chzwmn
>
>Art is something that makes you think and feel. If an artist can
>elicit an emotional response from an individual than that artist is
>doing something right, no matter the type or intensity.
>
>> And I prefer Bach to Eminen too. Enimen is a white boy black-wanabe
>and I don't
>> like being preached at about life on the street.
>
>In this instance, the artist in question elicited a semi-angry
>response (as is the case with Eminem), thus creating an account of
>that person in your mind. Even though you may not like him, you know
>his name, what style of music he sings, and what he sings about. And
>because of that, he is famous. He is an artist.
>
>That is the beauty of art. While it may be created with but one
>meaning in mind, with each new perceptual encounter that meaning
>changes.
>
>So what is the definition of art? Art is the random usage of our
>sensory perceptions to incite various thought and emotion. Yes,
>that's broad, but with our clumsy language it's the best I could do
>8)
">Art is something that makes you think and feel." Is philosophy art? What is
not art?
"Art is not random in any sense!"
tg
> >
> >"Chzwmn" <chz...@aol.com> wrote in message
> >news:20040229120604...@mb-m19.aol.com...
> >> >ubject: Re: Art as definition and statement
> >> >Path:
> >> >lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!nntp1.roc.gblx.net!nntp.g
> >> blx.net!nntp.gblx.net!tdsnet-transit!newspeer.tds.net!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-01!
> >> sn-post-01!supernews.com!corp.supernews.com!not-for-mail
> >> >From: "Miller" chumley70...@chartermi.net
> >> >Newsgroups: alt.philosophy
> >> >Date: Sun, 29 Feb 2004 10:59:03 -0500
> >> >Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com
> >> >Message-ID: <104431p...@corp.supernews.com>
> >> >References: <1041vvk...@corp.supernews.com>
> >> ><20040229083024...@mb-m23.aol.com>
> >> >X-Priority: 3
> >> >X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
> >> >X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2800.1158
> >> >X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2800.1165
> >> >X-Complaints-To: ab...@supernews.com
> >> >Lines: 26
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >"Chzwmn" <chz...@aol.com> wrote in message
> >> >news:20040229083024...@mb-m23.aol.com...
> >> >> >
> >> >
> >> CW
> >
> >You said to contrast Rothko with Rosetti,as if it had something to do with
> >artistic "full engagement" and all. What about it?
> >
> >Scott
> >
> >
> Ok, here we go. I feel that there is more craft in one painting by Rosetti than
> an entire exhibition by Rothko!
> How about you?
This is a meaningless comparison. But to make it:
Rothko had much more to choose to leave out than Rosetti. In the craft
of expression, he wins hands down.
-tg
Chzwmn
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> >"Chzwmn" <chz...@aol.com> wrote in message
>> >> >news:20040229083024...@mb-m23.aol.com...
>> >> >> >
>> >> >
>> >> What about what???
>> >> CW
>> >
>> >You said to contrast Rothko with Rosetti,as if it had something to do with
>> >artistic "full engagement" and all. What about it?
>> >
>> >Scott
>> >
>> >
>> Ok, here we go. I feel that there is more craft in one painting by Rosetti
>than
>> an entire exhibition by Rothko!
>> How about you?
>
>
>This is a meaningless comparison. But to make it:
>
>Rothko had much more to choose to leave out than Rosetti. In the craft
>of expression, he wins hands down.
>
>-tg
Why did he not just leave his canvas blank and then really impress you, then???
Rothko expresses nothing but a smile on his bank manager's face. A complete
charlatan. A craftless cheat.
addiss
<chz...@aol.com> writes
Craft is the process of physically constructing, it's literal and
predictable, the best it can do for the soul is to help it imagine
moments of physical interaction and stimulate the physical senses.
How can you consider what Rothko's work can mean if you already know
what meaning you are looking for?
addiss
Chzwmn
Have you ever done any craft? It is a process of learning improvising and
improving. This is something that is apparent in Rossetti but not in Rothko.
A 4 year old child can make a Rothko
with as much art, a child cannot reproduce a Rossetti.
>
>How can you consider what Rothko's work can mean if you already know
>what meaning you are looking for?
>
The meaning of Rothko's "work" is different for everybody, as I is not aimed
and any particular statement. It is craftless and reproducable by all. His
"art" is directionless and devoid of effort.
addiss
<chz...@aol.com> writes
Yes, and I appreciate the qualities of Rossetti's art and craftsmanship.
>It is a process of learning improvising and
>improving. This is something that is apparent in Rossetti but not in Rothko.
>A 4 year old child can make a Rothko
>with as much art, a child cannot reproduce a Rossetti.
Craft is the application of materials and if you judge it according to
your aesthetic opinion then you will miss much. Craft has moved on from
creating what is functional or pleasing the patron, it's now free to be
part of whatever experience exists. Rothko's paintings (and abstract
expressionism) makes craft indistinguishable from anything else in the
work, so viewing in terms of craft is irrelevant.
>>
>>How can you consider what Rothko's work can mean if you already know
>>what meaning you are looking for?
>>
>The meaning of Rothko's "work" is different for everybody, as I is not aimed
>and any particular statement. It is craftless and reproducable by all. His
>"art" is directionless and devoid of effort.
his work is not reproducible, his work is part of his being.
disassembling a Ferrari then training a monkey to reassemble it does not
make the qualities of the Ferrari void.
addiss
Chzwmn
small child could make something as good?.
I think it is time to de-bunk art. When Andy Warhol took a picture of a crewed
up piece of paper he was flushing down the toilet - calling it art, he was
cockinfg a snoop at art dealers and laughing all the way to the bank. You take
your Rothko if you like - but he don't fool me. I appreciate talent and
craftsmanship. Art without craft is for the confused. I don't give two hoots
for Tracy Emin's bed - it is a bed with some old crusty tissue paper and some
bread crumbs - this is not art! Give me something where the artist has sweated,
and taken pains to work hard, let me see the blood of the sculptor on the
stones!!! That is hard - the degree of engagement with the material. The rest
is a veneer, a lie, a cheat, sold to the bewildered, and traded by the
cynical..
addiss
<chz...@aol.com> writes
Rothko's work is ok, he's not a personal favourite of mine but I can
appreciate he's done something different and something that continues to
hold my curiosity whichever way I approach him.
how can I say how well your small child can make art?
Tracey Emin's Bed is great art. I believe it! Life is her craft, she
lived to create her bed, she created snot and made crusty tissues, she
engaged with bread to create crumbs. She menstruated and presented her
knickers to give you the blood you wanted. She sweated for her art. She
is a brave artist. I love her work.
how could you live her life? how could you recreate this work?
addiss
Gea Jones
Tracey Emin,
yes Rossetti is good, very good,
Tracey Emin , so she thinks her periods are worth putting in the Tate
????????????[big ego no talent]
Rothko, oh Rothko,
I senicerley hope you , one day see his work as it is meant to be seen,
his painTings make me shiver,
and he died for his art
Gea
"addiss" <add...@engla.nd> wrote in message
news:$sBF4ZlK$5QA...@engla.nd...
Gea Jones
"slippery customers ?" Artists, maybe you mean some'popular' artists
what do you mean?
some people would say that Leonardo wasn't an Artist, it is too much for
some people to bear the thought of someone have so much talent,
Gea
ps sorry about my spelling I'm anaemic[?]
Miller
But Rothko and Eminem have craft also, you just do not like it. Or you can
call it talent, skill, finesse, whatever--but what it comes down to is a
matter of taste.
For example: I don't particularily like Eminem (or at least get nothing out
of him) but saying I just don't like him is not enough, I must have a
qualifier that you hope others will think significant. Therefor, I find his
"craft" lacking, its "not music", he's a "white boy black-wanabe". All
perjorative terms to make someone else think that I have some authority over
deciding what is and is not acceptable in the realm of art.
I guess I just think that art is bigger than any one person's opinion.
Scott
Miller
"Tabula Rasa" <wave_...@hotmail-dot-com.no-spam.invalid> wrote in message
news:40428...@Usenet.com...
> Art is something that makes you think and feel. If an artist can
> elicit an emotional response from an individual than that artist is
> doing something right, no matter the type or intensity.
>
> > And I prefer Bach to Eminen too. Enimen is a white boy black-wanabe
> and I don't
> > like being preached at about life on the street.
>
> In this instance, the artist in question elicited a semi-angry
> response (as is the case with Eminem), thus creating an account of
> that person in your mind. Even though you may not like him, you know
> his name, what style of music he sings, and what he sings about. And
> because of that, he is famous. He is an artist.
>
> That is the beauty of art. While it may be created with but one
> meaning in mind, with each new perceptual encounter that meaning
> changes.
>
> So what is the definition of art? Art is the random usage of our
> sensory perceptions to incite various thought and emotion. Yes,
> that's broad, but with our clumsy language it's the best I could do
> 8)
>
>
Perhaps such a broad definition of art is the best we can do and should go
no further. Do we really want to get bogged down in issues of "craft",
"technique" and all that jazz?
Scott
addiss
<Geaj...@btinternet.com> writes
>Rothko is by far the superior to Rossetti as a Genius in Art,and twit
>Tracey Emin,
>yes Rossetti is good, very good,
>Tracey Emin , so she thinks her periods are worth putting in the Tate
>????????????[big ego no talent]
I don't know if she thinks that, but why would her periods not be worth
putting in the Tate?
>Rothko, oh Rothko,
>I senicerley hope you , one day see his work as it is meant to be seen,
>his painTings make me shiver,
>and he died for his art
>Gea
i'll try
addiss
Gea Jones
Yes Please, I love discussing Art , lately I've been thinking about how
artists really do express themselves through their work, and often have
difficulty expressing their feelings in other more usual ways,
compare it to language..... no, look at the letters, black and white,
plain , dull,
yet on this very same computer I can create bright colourful pictures
which have a completely different impact,
Gea
Miller
"Gea Jones" <Geaj...@btinternet.com> wrote in message
news:c20fmn$9p9$1...@sparta.btinternet.com...
The remarkable thing is that we can create bright, colorful pictures with
words only--the art of literature and poetry. Or that a particular response
can be invoked with only abstract images or music.
Is it only craft if the technique is technically difficult or hard to
reproduce? Or is there something to be said for art as an action, as an
experience, as an event?
Humans are multi-level beings. We do not exist as a function of instinct,
or merely as a result of neurological processes. We are not content to
stand in one place, with a single, safe point of view on things and declare:
This, then, is how it is.
No. We seemingly must be all over the place or we are nowhere. Our mantra
is perpetual change. We endeavor to continually engage ourselves in the
universe. That is art.
Scott
amodal1
of it or in calling it art?
is art an object or an experience?
who is authorized to tag a work as art?
does new media REALLY alter the work in any significant way (ie. the
lack of an original)? does a musical work have an original to copy?
Chzwmn
>Tracey Emin,
>yes Rossetti is good, very good,
>Tracey Emin , so she thinks her periods are worth putting in the Tate
>????????????[big ego no talent]
>Rothko, oh Rothko,
>I senicerley hope you , one day see his work as it is meant to be seen,
>his painTings make me shiver,
>and he died for his art
>Gea
It is meant to be seen by each individual AS and individual - you cannot imply
there is one way. His art is meant to be seen by his bank manager with $$$$
signs in his eyes. I know niothing about how he died or about him - art should
be able to stand alone
Chzwmn
>hold my curiosity whichever way I approach him.
>
>how can I say how well your small child can make art?
>
>Tracey Emin's Bed is great art. I believe it! Life is her craft, she
>lived to create her bed, she created snot and made crusty tissues, she
>engaged with bread to create crumbs. She menstruated and presented her
>knickers to give you the blood you wanted. She sweated for her art. She
>is a brave artist. I love her work.
>
>how could you live her life? how could you recreate this work?
>
>
>addiss
>
more and interesting stories than hers. We all have a life (perhaps some more
than others), and life is art. I just don't think we should make hers into some
kind of iconic monument!!
Chzwmn
>> that they do different art tends to extend and change the boundaries. Some
>> artists would say that Leonardo was not an artist as such or at least,
>much of
>> what he did was not art...
>
>"slippery customers ?" Artists, maybe you mean some'popular' artists
>what do you mean?
>some people would say that Leonardo wasn't an Artist, it is too much for
>some people to bear the thought of someone have so much talent,
>Gea
>ps sorry about my spelling I'm anaemic[?]
Just call me Dick SLexia.. We should all make our own decisions about what we
like, and how we define art.
addiss
<amo...@amodalcitizen.net> writes
>does the significance of the work lie in each individual's experience
>of it or in calling it art?
yes, so it can be created and exist
>
>is art an object or an experience?
>
it can take any form
see here...
http://www.diacenter.org/exhibs_b/becher/
>who is authorized to tag a work as art?
>
those who think art is like this
>does new media REALLY alter the work in any significant way (ie. the
>lack of an original)? does a musical work have an original to copy?
>
I think new media is itself disposable, it's about engaging with the
world as a paying consumer.
Musical work can be transcribed or recorded so it can be copied. The
copying makes it appear original.
addiss
Gea Jones
* Rothko,He commited suicide after a life of a severe depressive illness
Gea
Gea Jones
"addiss" <add...@engla.nd> wrote in message
I once looked at a beautiful little sketch by Henry Moore of sheep in a
field,
after that I saw sheep in a different way, my father explained to me that
good or great art makes you look at things differently.................
this interested me and I do feel it is true,
if art helps you to look at the world through different eyes you can gain a
new perspective or idea of the object depicted.
Apart from that, in the graphics programme on my computer you have access
to
sixteen million colours !!!
Isn't that incredible?
Best Wishes
Gea
addiss
<Geaj...@btinternet.com> writes
>
Anything that approaches art in it's own terms (your lyrical sheep in a
field story)... becomes art and so makes a relevant statement.
>Apart from that, in the graphics programme on my computer you have access
>to
>sixteen million colours !!!
>Isn't that incredible?
>Best Wishes
>Gea
Computers are part of something bigger... the natural world (analogue
stuff) like rainbows etc... that's incredible!!.. any colour you like!
: )
addiss
addiss
<chz...@aol.com> writes
What if I believed your sweaty bed was art and I took a photograph and
exhibited it.
Which of us is the artist?
addiss
Gea Jones
"addiss" <add...@engla.nd> wrote in message
well just to be practical there is some sort of acid test about "would you
put that on your living room wall?"
the actual bed seems, well improbable, the photograph, possible ... but..
well not something I would really like to look at [no offence]
surely 'Art' isn't some sort of religion , but a form of decoration [to an
extent]
and maybe , for the average person, it will give them something.. to touch
the soul
Gea
Gea Jones
"addiss" <add...@engla.nd> wrote in message
I love it , I love colour and as computers are still limited I wonder how
many colours there are in reality, billions probably,
Gea
ps I tried to send you a picture but your email address sent it back !!
Chzwmn
>* Rothko,He commited suicide after a life of a severe depressive illness
>Gea
I'm not surprised to hear that, but I beleive that a piece of art should stand
on its own. Van Gough has some appeal, but I don not accept such high value for
his art as this was stimulated by the facts of his life.
Gea Jones
The facts of someones life can never add or subtract from the value of their
work[not monetary],
they can enhance or enrich understanding maybe,
[as in war paintings ], but if something is really not good it can't be
justified by any amount of hair-pulling, or even suicide,
if you quite like Van Gogh there is some hope for you,
what a relief !!
Gea
addiss
<Geaj...@btinternet.com> writes
<snip>
>> >
>> >I once looked at a beautiful little sketch by Henry Moore of sheep in a
>> >field,
>> >after that I saw sheep in a different way, my father explained to me that
>> >good or great art makes you look at things differently.................
>> >this interested me and I do feel it is true,
>> >if art helps you to look at the world through different eyes you can gain
>a
>> >new perspective or idea of the object depicted.
>>
>> Anything that approaches art in it's own terms (your lyrical sheep in a
>> field story)... becomes art and so makes a relevant statement.
>>
>>
>> >Apart from that, in the graphics programme on my computer you have
>access
>> >to
>> >sixteen million colours !!!
>> >Isn't that incredible?
>> >Best Wishes
>> >Gea
>>
>> Computers are part of something bigger... the natural world (analogue
>> stuff) like rainbows etc... that's incredible!!.. any colour you like!
>> : )
>>
>>
>>
>> addiss
>
>I love it , I love colour and as computers are still limited I wonder how
>many colours there are in reality, billions probably,
>Gea
I think what i'm saying is colour is an experience and has boundaries
only
by what we create. Choosing to qualify colours is one of the boundaries,
and I think that boundary is science or craft not art. Like your sheep
story,
that describes art because it is of the same thing.
>ps I tried to send you a picture but your email address sent it back !!
>
>
my usenet email address is a spam black-hole, but send again please, i'm
here... ugan...@hotmail.com
addiss
Chzwmn
THere is no need to be patronising!!! You obviously feel that your take on art
is superior to mine. All I said was that I appreciated craftsmanship in art as
it can demonstrate the artist's engagement with tthe medium.
Gea Jones
Sorry, it came out the wrong way, I can be a bit defensive, anyway more
interesting this was on the news tonight :
"Scientists using the Hubble Space Telescope said they see similarities
between a newly released image of a distant expanding star and Vincent van
Gogh`s painting "The Starry Night."
coincidence ???
Best Wishes
Gea
Chocolate Peanut
>>Tracey Emin's Bed is great art. I believe it! Life is her craft, she
>>lived to create her bed, she created snot and made crusty tissues, she
>>engaged with bread to create crumbs. She menstruated and presented her
>>knickers to give you the blood you wanted. She sweated for her art. She
>>is a brave artist. I love her work.
>>how could you live her life? how could you recreate this work?
>>
>Her life like her art is over-rated. COme and look at my sweaty bed - It
>tells
>more and interesting stories than hers. We all have a life (perhaps some more
>than others), and life is art. I just don't think we should make hers into
>some
>kind of iconic monument!!
I think that the fact that you are talking about and discussing it shows that
it 'is' art...that's what art is meant to do...communicate...:)
Peanut
Chocolate Peanut
>What if I believed your sweaty bed was art and I took a photograph and
>exhibited it.
>
>Which of us is the artist?
The one who exhibits it. When you exhibit something you are stating that it is
art,and when someone looks at it and wonders, they are also stating it is
art...
Peanut