Is This Art?

jesus420

jesus420

Well-Known Member
art asks a question.

this piece is technically art, but the question it asks is simple and vague... it's too easy to answer.

so keep asking questions with your art until it asks you questions you can't answer but desperately want to. then you can consider yourself an artist. but that's just imo.
 
HoppusTheCaveman

HoppusTheCaveman

Well-Known Member
I'm pretty sure that can be considered art if I've seen a canvas just totally covered in black in an art museum...which I really can't understand why still....
 
Scuba

Scuba

Well-Known Member
that is art but the morallity of it is wat sets ppl off, the dudes fucked up, i agree. I love dogs but i would never hurt an animal for the sake of art. WTF that's pretty sidistic of him to starve the dog. If it was already dead then wat ever.
A person has done art with dead human body's that detail the muscle system. Tgey look pretty weird.
 
Das Jackal

Das Jackal

Active Member
art is a form of expression, if you're trying to express something then I guess it can be construed as art.
 
Psychedelics and Chronic

Psychedelics and Chronic

Well-Known Member
jats said:
when I take sid,,,I don't lose my good taste
Click to expand...
I'll agree with that and add that mine seem to get more picky the more lucy I'm on. If I start looking at art while tripping they I usually get annoyed with what I find and have to then search for some of :clap:Alex Grey's:clap: (or something similar) work to satisfy me. If you don't know about him, just google his name.
 
Blayzd

Blayzd

Active Member
Some fella called Andy once said "art is what you can get away with" lol I tend to agree. One mans art is another mans rubbish.
 
K

kylekush

Active Member
its art i guess, just really shitty art. and i know what sid is, just surprised it didnt make you produce a better picture than that. it looks like the batch of sids you got was bunk!
 
Brick Top

Brick Top

New Member
"Is this art?" Well art is in the eye of the beholder. To someone who believes Rembrandt’s work defines what art is they may look at a Picasso and say it looks like some kids water color finger painting or the work of some half talented artist who was painting while on acid.

It all depends on who is looking at something and how broad and flexible their definition or belief about what art is happens to be. Some people will look at a wall of a building or a highway underpass where someone with a few cans of spray paint did their thing and see art and others will look at it and not see art and only see vandalism.
 
natmoon

natmoon

Well-Known Member
Anything physically useless that you create for your own or others pleasure is art really,just not in everyone's eyes and often only in your ownbongsmilie
 
Brick Top

Brick Top

New Member
natmoon said:
Anything physically useless that you create for your own or others pleasure is art really,just not in everyone's eyes and often only in your ownbongsmilie
Click to expand...

I am sure that many art critics and professors of art and art majors would disagree with you but to a degree I would agree with you.

As the tile to the Pretenders song goes there is a; "Thin Line Between Love and Hate" and that is very true when it comes to art. Something my be able to be considered to be art but it can more easily than not be horrible art that is just barely artistic in the slightest of ways and then there is good art that is very artistic in nature.

The difference is you will see the borderline art on the walls and shelves of cheap stores and flea auctions and in second hand stores collecting dust and selling for peanuts, if it can manage to be sold at all, and you will see long lines of people waiting their turn to see quality art and people paying massive sums of money for quality art.

It is like how people will pay to watch A, AA and AAA baseball games but not nearly in the numbers that go to see major league teams. All of them are baseball but the quality ranges tremendously and the better it is the more people that will be attracted to it and enjoy it and the lower quality it is the fewer people will be attracted to it and enjoy it.

As I said beauty is in the eye of the beholder but quality is not, that is only found in the work of art or in many cases not found in many works of what people like to call art.

Like the example I used of different people looking at a wall or a highway overpass where someone took a few cans of spray paint and did their thing. Some people will look at it and see art and other people will look at the very same thing and see vandalism.

What may be at least somewhat artistic in most of it appeals to so very few that it can be considered to be borderline art at best. Does that still make it art? Well only in the eyes of the person who created it and in the eyes of each individual who looks at is and none of them is the final arbiter of what is art and what is not art in such borderline cases.

When it comes to anything quality, regardless of what it is, the quality will shine like the brightest star on a moonless night and in other things you have to look ver hard to find some degree of quality and sometimes many, most or none will ever find it regardless of how hard they look for it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top