English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

2006-10-17 04:20:35 · 4 answers · asked by fd f 1 in Arts & Humanities Other - Arts & Humanities

4 answers

Art is defined as what people people find in your Creation. If they can relate to it and enjoy it for what it is then It has meaning for them and is considered ART.

2006-10-17 05:17:18 · answer #1 · answered by pat m 1 · 0 0

It is common in the history of art for people to dispute about whether a particular form or work, or particular piece of work counts as art or not. Philosophers of Art call these disputes “classificatory disputes about art.” For example, Ancient Greek philosophers debated about whether or not ethics should be considered the “art of living well.” Classificatory disputes in the 20th century included: cubist and impressionist paintings, Duchamp’s urinal, the movies, superlative imitations of banknotes, propaganda, and even a crucifix immersed in urine. Conceptual art often intentionally pushes the boundaries of what counts as art and a number of recent conceptual artists, such as Damien Hirst and Tracy Emin have produced works about which there are active disputes. Video games and role-playing games are both fields where some recent critics have asserted that they do count as art, and some have asserted that they do not.

Philosopher David Novitz has argued that disagreement about the definition of art, are rarely the heart of the problem, rather that “the passionate concerns and interests that humans vest in their social life” are “so much a part of all classificatory disputes about art” (Novitz, 1996). According to Novitz, classificatory disputes are more often disputes about our values and where we are trying to go with our society than they are about theory proper. For example, when the Daily Mail criticized Hirst and Enim’s work by arguing "For 1,000 years art has been one of our great civilising forces. Today, pickled sheep and soiled beds threaten to make barbarians of us all" they are not advancing a definition or theory about art, but questioning the value of Hirst’s and Enim’s work.

2006-10-17 11:30:16 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

whatever an artists decides that it is art...but it does not neseccerily needs to be good art. read Arthur Dantó.

2006-10-17 14:20:55 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Whatever the powers-that-be say it is...

2006-10-17 11:40:17 · answer #4 · answered by retorik75 5 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers