|
GoldenEye
...



Registered: 05/24/13
Posts: 4,340
Loc: Amsterdam
Last seen: 6 months, 19 days
|
Definition of art
#19129744 - 11/13/13 01:58 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
I've had two discussions on the shroomery lately that kind of boiled down to different opinions on what art actually is (or should be).
I think it's interesting to see how art is always considered this universal thing, yet the definitions of it can almost be total opposites.
I would love to hear some definitions and shall start it off by sharing mine:
For me, art is purely communication. This can be communication of ideas, feelings, experiences, questions, statements, even mystery and so forth. Technique and medium are just instrumental to the message (although the message can of course also be about a medium or a technique). If everything aligns and the message is conveyed, the work of art is a good work of art.
Share!
|
Spacerific
- - - >


Registered: 10/13/12
Posts: 4,923
Last seen: 8 years, 9 months
|
Re: Definition of art [Re: GoldenEye]
#19130457 - 11/13/13 09:26 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
I don't much care for text definition of things personally, but I find what Alex Grey said on art, pretty relevant here. I don't have the quote handy, but basically it went like, what you're trying to do as an artist is have an experience worth sharing, and then share it in some way with others.
Two parts to it - experience worth sharing, and doing it right (technique, skill, mastery etc). For me this works pretty well. Also some very renowned and exorbitantly priced "artists" that greatly fail to fit here IMO.
But why do you need a text definition? Isn't the gut feeling and like/dislike, interest/disinterest vibe you get by yourself quite enough?
-------------------- Blessed are your eyes because they see, and your ears because they hear.
For truly, I say to you, many prophets and righteous people longed to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it. - Matthew 13:16
|
GoldenEye
...



Registered: 05/24/13
Posts: 4,340
Loc: Amsterdam
Last seen: 6 months, 19 days
|
|
I don't need a definition.
I'm just observant of differences in what people consider art. It makes me interested in what makes other people have that gut feeling you spoke of. This can only be communicated to me in words so I might as well ask for a definition...
I like your addition of the experience element! I feel it would certainly add to an artwork if it is strongly rooted in personal experience. However, I don't think it's ultimately necessary.
I could base work on a story I've heard for instance... (I guess you could argue that I am then basing the work on the experience of hearing the story or that I link the story to personal experiences)
I disagree completely on the mastery part. This is partly why I started this thread. It seems to be so common in peoples requirements for good art. Why? There are plenty of photographers that wouldn't know how to expose correctly but they still come up with amazing books and projects... I'm sure this is true for other disciplines as well.
|
Spacerific
- - - >


Registered: 10/13/12
Posts: 4,923
Last seen: 8 years, 9 months
|
Re: Definition of art [Re: GoldenEye]
#19130658 - 11/13/13 10:34 AM (10 years, 2 months ago) |
|
|
By mastery I mean enough control of one's medium, in order to get the job done. Like if you're a martial artist you don't need to be a ballerina as well, or if you're a race driver you don't need to know how to drive trucks as well, but you do need some confidence / experience in your specific niche.
It's a skill specific to your chosen way of expression, and some of it may transfer over to similar ones. If you want to write, you need to know your grammar and vocabulary. If you draw and paint, you need to have some control of your hands and fingers, understanding of colors and values and composition and rhythm. If you sculpt, you need some level of control with your tools and 3D thinking and the material you're trying to work with.
If the photographer gets the job done and the images work, then the skill is probably enough for their specific needs, whatever they may be.
Keep in mind that observation and understanding of composition for instance, are skills as well. You may train those with drawing, then apply them with a camera. Not everything that goes into a good photo was initially trained with a camera, but there is some skill and insight there.
Generally you'll find that great photos come from countless bad photos that didn't work, and you don't get to see. Great paintings/drawings rest on mountains of failed attempts, sketches, ripped apart papers and frustration, etc. The end result that you see after years of practice may look simple and effortless to the naked eye, and it is, but it's the confidence of someone that's worked with those specific tools for a long long time, making them second nature.
-------------------- Blessed are your eyes because they see, and your ears because they hear.
For truly, I say to you, many prophets and righteous people longed to see what you see, and did not see it, and to hear what you hear, and did not hear it. - Matthew 13:16
|
GreySatyr
Pagan-Psyche


Registered: 06/20/13
Posts: 3,376
Loc: North Carolina
Last seen: 9 years, 8 months
|
|
Art is as art does.
-------------------- ...also, go to hell, huh?
|
|