ART
2006-10-06 08:07:31
·
answer #1
·
answered by sexy-latina 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
It's a "chicken or egg first" question. Art is based on the perception of an underlying design, so that the design could be said to have come first - yet the first design may have been based on an attempt to produce what we now refer to as art.
2006-10-06 15:27:48
·
answer #2
·
answered by Grist 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
That's a really good question!
If you mean designing your own objects, I guess that came before art. Apes have tool-making capabilities and many creatures construct homes and defences.
However, if you mean designing for production by others, I wuold say that is a function of a more industrialised age and so comes after art.
2006-10-12 20:24:04
·
answer #3
·
answered by Bridget F 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Art because it was once abstract and served no other purpose than for people to look upon and to decorate cave walls - design came in when interior designers, clothes designers and any other designers decided they could make money from this artistic ability.
2006-10-13 10:58:02
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's my belief that 'art' per se 'came first' for want of a better expression - I believe it is the human desire to self-express that manifested itself into a material form. I believe that pure art is not for design but for pleasure and after that for solving problematic issues that words may not be able to express. It was never originally meant or used to formulate any specific intention.
Design is to put into physical place a pattern of thought that has specific intention and desired end result - and came after art as a result of humankind's natural inquisitiveness of 'doing something' with something - part of our evolutionary development.
This is why the term is art AND design, not art design.
[And if this question is to do with your homework - I hope this helps!]
2006-10-11 05:38:52
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
The first art, as we understand it, are the many cave paintings, esp found in southern European caves, France etc. Design might have been applied to making flint arrow heads, these were probably made by craftsmen and had to look more or less the same - a sort of production line. So I guess the answer to your question depends on which you think came first, cave paintings or flint arrow heads.
I vote for flint arrow heads; with these you can kill animals to eat. You cannot eat art.
2006-10-09 13:15:19
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Since you cannot have art without having designed it (at least in your head) and art is in the eye of the beholder, I'd say design. Buts that’s just my opinion after beholding the question you designed.
2006-10-06 15:49:40
·
answer #7
·
answered by Ralph 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
The genuine meaning of the Art is Art of living. The Real Art reveals to instructed persons one or more life's truths which can be used for better living (happier and fulfilling).Lower level of the art is decoration (without message), offering fine impressions (inducing fine feelings) through harmony or excitement through surprise or shock.
2006-10-13 03:26:58
·
answer #8
·
answered by oceangleam 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
art comes before design because the inspiration for a composition comes before the tools to do the work. without inspiration there is no design. if ya get me!
2006-10-09 14:03:20
·
answer #9
·
answered by charlie a 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Art and Design go hand in hand dont they?
2006-10-09 06:36:01
·
answer #10
·
answered by GLYN D 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
I presume design: art and aesthetics are not about survival, but are about intellectual aggrandisement, which inevitably comes after essential needs are met. Good question, by the way.
2006-10-06 15:11:37
·
answer #11
·
answered by hallam_blue 3
·
1⤊
0⤋