Home | Community | Message Board
You are not signed in.
Sign In New Account
Forum Index Search Posts Trusted Vendors Highlights Galleries FAQ User List Chat Store Random Growery

Magic Mushrooms Zamnesia
This site includes paid links. Please support our sponsors.

General Interest > Music, Art, and Media
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Welcome to the Shroomery Message Board! You are experiencing a small sample of what the site has to offer. Please login or register to post messages and view our exclusive members-only content. You'll gain access to additional forums, file attachments, board customizations, encrypted private messages, and much more!

Jump to first unread post Pages: 1 | 2 |  [ show all ]
My definition of "art"
    #4100794 -

Art.

There is no such thing as what art isn't.

We've all dug through music libraries and cd collections and said at once point in our lives "this artist sucks" or "this band sucks". It's one thing to say this in a joking manner. Any mature adult who says something like this and actually believes is has no concept of what art or science truly is.

There is an art and a science to everything in this world.

Science is the technical aspect of a job, a process, and object, a system. Art is the human passion and drive behind carrying it out. Nothing can exist without either side. Art is the yin to scientific yang. A passion may be an emotional reward or sense of relief or even a sense of letting a force take over you. To Jackson Pollock , Marcel Duchamp , and John Cage art was a cosmic and subconcious force that guided their hand to create imagery and music. To GG Allin and Chris Burden , art was the action of changing the way people thought about their everyday surroundings by having viewers focus on the ACTION... seeing beauty and art in 'being', 'seeing' and 'doing' and not just in creating tangable, ownable, syndicated goods. To Sun Tzu and Igor Stravinsky, art was a similar application as well.

"Painting" is generally considered an art, but there is a science to it. The chemistry and physics inside the paint which create the color we perceive is science. The acoustics of a venue and shape of the sonic vibrations are the scientific elements to music which is an art. The electricity and lighting and perspective that a director or photographer needs to create a particular mood is science. The creation of this mood, manipuation of space, and use of this color in the artist's eye *CREATES* the effect of art. The reward they feel from acting on this *IS* art. Art doesn't neccessarily even have to be represented as a physical object or product, but by an action, hence why sports, performance 'art', and war are often referred to as art.

Having said that, no art can truly "suck". Art is just the physical manifestation of someone else's passion and drive, whether it be performance art, a painting, the ride of as wave, driving a car, beating on a drum, or movement of a tool, prop, or weapon. And it is THAT person' art, THAT person's passion being manifested. It may not be to the viewer's liking or aesthetics, but to the person commiting the action or creating a work... it *IS* art... at least in their frame of reference. Art is then created. Art may be a positive force to help relieve someone's stress or dimentia... or it may be a negative force such as hate propoganda against another people or nation (as often parodied by Shepard Fairey ).

To say that something isn't art that the creator defines as art him/herself, is simply wrong. Using this definition of art; it is true anyone who listens to a song or watches a movie, who says that this piece "sucks" and believes it may think that they know more about art, when they are proving just the opposite. They have no concept of what is going on inside someone else's head, and to say that someone else's art is sucks basically the same as saying that we have a better idea of the reasons someone else has for doing what they do, which is simply wrong. It isn't for the audience to judge whether or not something is art, but the art "test" lies in the creator him/herself.

Why I chose art:

There is an art and a science to just "life" as well. This is where my story draws a turning point. As a bachelor and professional of information systems and someone who has let technology pilot half of his life, I've been consumed by the science. I'm tired of it and I'm afraid that this empty work will turn me into a compassionless drone by my middle age. I'm going back to the artistic passions I embraced as a child attending a school for 'gifted kids' when I used to sketch and write poems and short stories and enter my pieces into local competitions.

I enjoy a good challange. I always have, since I learned to put together puzzles as a toddler. Every challenge needs a reward though. I don't mean a physical or monetary award, but an emotional award; a sense of satisfaction, pride, and accomplishment. My enjoyment of working with code and logic has turned into nothing but the application of statistics and dollar dollar figures, the creation financial and executive reports for managers to translate their fellow man into small factors in greater profitable decisions without the slightest hint of empathy for fellow human beings. The pride and accomplishment I used to feel by tackling complex problems on machines has turned into disgust and contempt.

I'm turning my back on science and opening a door to the room I used to play in as a child. I've decided to return to school to study photojournalism to help capture the emotions and struggles from different nationalities and present them to the world, to study and to try to understand the way we live... with the same passion and fairness I used to give so much weight to when I was so young.

"LIFE" is *my* new art and world peace is my new goal. I know I will not ever see an absolute version of the latter in my life time, but if I can exit the final scene of my life story knowing that even a single image I took, had a positive 'butterfly' effect on a nation, a community or a small classroom then I will die happy (and probably poor). If I can convince even a single person that those suffering in other 'countries' are not foreigners, but his brothers, my job will be done, a job that will give me this feeling of relief, accomplishment, and 'art' that I used to feel as a teenage computer programmer, or a childhood artist.

- BrAiN

"he who dies with the most toys, still dies" - some random dude

Edited by BrAiN (04/26/05 10:54 PM)

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: My definition of "art" [Re: BrAiN]
    #4100800 -

you are so much cooler than i thought.


--------------------
Men look at themselves and they see flawed humans, we look at women and we see perfect
GODDESSES
Women look at themselves and they seem utterly human, when looking at men they see proud
GODS.

~Casil



:cactus:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: My definition of "art" [Re: BrAiN]
    #4100909 -

you're a silly person

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: My definition of "art" [Re: vampirism]
    #4100919 -

yea.. i guess.. i dunno.. i've had random shit about art and work muddling in my mind for months now.. i just needed to get it out, written in stone or else i was going to go crazy

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: My definition of "art" [Re: BrAiN]
    #4100926 -

:shrug: I can understand how avoiding nontechnical things forever could do that




btw, are you also suggesting that if the creator suggests something is not art, then we are to take his word for it?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: My definition of "art" [Re: vampirism]
    #4101017 -

well... i guess...

the only person who know's his intentions is the artist himself.

one man's urinal is another man's art :wink:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: My definition of "art" [Re: BrAiN]
    #4101097 -

ah, but if I disagree?

Is it really immature to reject someone's opinion art? I would contend that accepting everything is indicative of having no real opinion yourself. When it comes down to it, art is opinion. But there are stupid opinions. *I* define stupid for me.

It reminds me of an episode of American Chopper.. The guy who made the bike designs and everything said "I'm not an artist or anything like that." That made me think. On the one hand, I wanted to respect his opinion. On the other hand, he was given a conceptual problem to deal with, and he dealt with it with creativity, skill and personal expression. Who cares if his medium was a chopper. Ultimately I decided he WAS an artist.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: My definition of "art" [Re: BrAiN]
    #4101196 -

BrAiN said:
no art can truly "suck". Art is just the physical manifestation of someone else's passion and drive, whether it be performance art, a painting, the ride of as wave, driving a car, beating on a drum, or movement of a tool, prop, or weapon. And it is THAT person' art, THAT person's passion being manifested.


:thumbup:This is awsome, thanks for takeing the time to type all that out, It is appreciated. Great, intellegent post.  :smile: :heart: :hug:


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: My definition of "art" [Re: vampirism]
    #4101234 -

peoples perception of what art is and what it is to be an artist very greatly. You are correct, just because he does not consider himself an artist does not mean he is not capable of creating art or being an artist, if you consider an artist to be anyone who creats art, which is pretty much the way I see it. It's likely his idea of what it is to be an artist is much different than mine, and does not feel that his creatiivity is worthy of the term artist. That is simply a result of the way art was taught to him.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: My definition of "art" [Re: emptywisdom]
    #4101249 -

makes me want to take up tap dancing.


--------------------
Men look at themselves and they see flawed humans, we look at women and we see perfect
GODDESSES
Women look at themselves and they seem utterly human, when looking at men they see proud
GODS.

~Casil



:cactus:

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: My definition of "art" [Re: emptywisdom]
    #4101255 -

Do you draw any distinction between fine art and craft?

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: My definition of "art" [Re: vampirism]
    #4101416 -

absolutley, and that is a personal distinction to make I belive. This is a good point. I also draw a distinction between fine art and art in general, and I consider a passionate craft an art, but not necissarilly a fine art. There is art for the sake of art, and art that is a byproduct of one's craft. both are products of passion. They are just in different classes.


--------------------

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: My definition of "art" [Re: vampirism]
    #4101898 -

Morrowind said:
ah, but if I disagree?

Is it really immature to reject someone's opinion art? I would contend that accepting everything is indicative of having no real opinion yourself. When it comes down to it, art is opinion. But there are stupid opinions. *I* define stupid for me.

It reminds me of an episode of American Chopper.. The guy who made the bike designs and everything said "I'm not an artist or anything like that." That made me think. On the one hand, I wanted to respect his opinion. On the other hand, he was given a conceptual problem to deal with, and he dealt with it with creativity, skill and personal expression. Who cares if his medium was a chopper. Ultimately I decided he WAS an artist.


maybe he was being modest or maybe he was using artist in the sense that art can only be a 'fine' art.

If you think it's art, then fine it's art to you. Look at Duchamp's piece "the fountain". If was just a urinal to someone else, but he just 'pointed" at it and called it art, therefore it was art to him.

It's all about frame of reference. To create art doesn't mean you have to physical be involved in modifying an object. THe builder didnt think of himself as an artist, but YOU saw the bike as art. Therefore the bike was art to YOU. You received the aesthetic satisfaction of looking at the beautfy of the bike, and YOUR reaction was art, maybe not his. Maybe I should change my statement sand say that art ISNT in the eye of the creator, but art lies in the one who is emotionally rewarded. This is what Marcel Duchamp was trying to prove with his piece... "the fountain". Check it out. It is considered one of the, if not THE, most influenctial works of art of the 20th century... yet... it's just a urinal he took out of a dumpster.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: My definition of "art" [Re: BrAiN]
    #4101931 -

christ.

as an artist i'm exposed to his things and theories constantly. I reject it as stupidity. And to add to the stupidity, there's a lot of speculation that he, in fact, did create it. It was the only one in existence, but it was supposed to be a mass-produced item.

As for the bike, he didn't pick it up out of nowhere. If I talked to him, I'm sure I could convince him he's an artist.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: My definition of "art" [Re: BrAiN]
    #4101961 -

I like how you think.

All things are artistic to one who thinks from an artistic point of view... and this is certainly not limited to urinals being posed as art... it includes every aspect of every single thing we're capable of encountering through our senses.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: My definition of "art" [Re: vampirism]
    #4103885 -

Morrowind said:
christ.

as an artist i'm exposed to his things and theories constantly. I reject it as stupidity. And to add to the stupidity, there's a lot of speculation that he, in fact, did create it. It was the only one in existence, but it was supposed to be a mass-produced item.

As for the bike, he didn't pick it up out of nowhere. If I talked to him, I'm sure I could convince him he's an artist.


to each their own

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: My definition of "art" [Re: BrAiN]
    #4104077 -

exactly!

but just a second ago you suggested that if someone isn't following your path, they're immature!

Really, that was the main thing that provoked me to respond.


The thing that annoys me about the popular view of art is that it is so openminded that it becomes horribly repressive

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: My definition of "art" [Re: vampirism]
    #4104549 -

No I didn't. I basically said that...

When you say someone else's art sucks, your statement doesn't hold any weight because art is about the passion it takes to create something, and when you belittle someone else's art, you're being inconsiderate... because he have no idea what was going through that person's head.

Even the name of this topic is "MY definition of art". *MY* as in my own. ANy good artist knows that the word 'art' is just a subjective term... and this is what it means to me

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: My definition of "art" [Re: BrAiN]
    #4104609 -

"Any good artist knows that the word 'art' is just a subjective term."
So hypothetically, you're saying if someone thinks there is objective art, they are instantly bad artists?

WHY is belittling passion bad? Why should passion instantly demand gratification and support? Passion should be attacked when it is misdirected, otherwise it can cause very very grave harm to someone or something. That's the essence of raising children- you reprimand them when they do something incredibly stupid, and hope they learn without having to do the damage first. True individuality is a lie, sometimes people are just immature. Yes, it's inconsiderate. But sometimes, being rough is the kindest way to go about things.


Anyway, I realize this is about *your* idea about art, but I'm just trying to keep it in check in areas where you overstep subjectivity into objectivity.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Re: My definition of "art" [Re: vampirism]
    #4104673 -

I guess this does cause a bit of contradiction.

I did say that art can be used for positive and negative things.... negative examples being like hate propoganda. You're right. We shouln't encourage shit like this... But to whoever was making that 'art' propoganda.. in their eyes it is art.

I never said that there couldn't be BAD art... Good and Bad are subjective... I just said that you couldn't deny that something WAS art. I'm not trying to go so far as to determine what is GOOD AND BAD, POSITIVE or NEGATIVE... personally, I have a more budhist way of thinking... I don't really believe in good vs bad/evil.

I'm just saying.. to some people... music like Punk rock is "crap". Let's take NOFX for example. I think they're one of the greatest punk bands out there. They're songs must consist of only a few chords, but there's more than just 'how many chords' and 'how soothing to the popular crowd' that art is. There's the way your voice sounds, there's the lyrics, there's just the general way they relate to their target audience (whether it me through sophisticated means, primal, etc) that is the beautiful thing.

Some 18 year old kid will pick up a nofx cd and think it's the most genious thing they've ever heard. A 60 year old conservative baby boomer would basically consider it 'garbage'.

Who's right? Is it good art? Is it bad art? Is it art at all? Who gets the final say? Who has the right to determine whether or not it's art?

Most people on the bb's here probably consider country music to be redneck twang crap. But to the hayseeds out there in the midwest... it gives people passion, pride, a reason to live, it creates emotion for the rednecks out there. When we say that it sucks, aren't we just saying that the feelings these people have aren't worth a damn? Who are we to decide who's right or wrong? We're just a bunch of fuckin' monkeys like everyone else? What makes one monkey more special than another monkey, that gives him the right to determine what art is 'better' or if something is an art even at all?

My definition wasn't to pick at the differences between what is GOOD and BAD art... more to say... who has the right to determine if something is art? Can any group of humans be trusted at all to make this distinction? Why should higher up, more established people in the 'art world' have the right to make the call? What makes them so special?

I'm just trying to say that art is all about frame of reference. If someone says something IS art to them, then it's art to them. If someone else says no.. that's not allowed to be art, that's like saying that the first person doesn't have the right to think his own way.

call is good art.. call it bad art.. whatever.. just still call it art :P

I'm not trying to bash you or anything, I'm just trying to get a healthy debate/discussion going.

Extras: Filter Print Post Top
Jump to top Pages: 1 | 2 |  [ show all ]

General Interest > Music, Art, and Media
Threaded Mode Threaded  Previous topic Previous  View all topics Index  Next topic Next 

Similar ThreadsPosterViewsRepliesLast post
* trippy artist painting cats CleverName 2,197 11 06/16/03 12:50 PM
by AislingGheal
* Artist's Prayer Anonymous 648 2 11/28/03 10:38 PM
by zorchmedia
* the artist uki 924 4 06/29/04 05:11 PM
by Papaver
* whats wrong with art? plexus 2,068 12 09/15/04 07:17 PM
by Blastrid
* is digtal art really art?
( 1 2 all )		 lilbilski4life 4,551 34 10/01/05 12:44 AM
by Soularize
* Important Music, Art, and Literature Links
( 1 2 3 4 all )		 Blastrid 40,962 64 12/05/11 12:22 AM
by Another Rube
* Artist needs your help for upcoming project beejay 1,935 8 02/04/05 01:22 AM
by djurg
* Artists Survival Ratio Northernsoul 821 1 07/17/04 05:19 PM
by MilkyMedia

Extra information
You cannot start new topics / You cannot reply to topics
HTML is disabled / BBCode is enabled
Moderator: Middleman, automan, DividedQuantum
4,538 topic views. 0 members, 1 guests and 20 web crawlers are browsing this forum.
[ Show Images Only | Sort by Score | Print Topic ]
Search this thread:

Copyright 1997-2026 Mind Media. Some rights reserved.

Generated in 0.033 seconds spending 0.008 seconds on 18 queries.