What is art?
Firstly, let us look at what is said about the art by the world’s largest and most trustworthy internet encyclopedia, Wikipedia: It says,
“The arts is a broad subdivision of culture, composed of many expressive disciplines. In modern usage, it is a term broader than "art", which usually means the visual arts (comprising fine art, decorative art, and crafts). The art encompasses visual arts, performing arts, language arts, and culinary arts. Many artistic disciplines involve aspects of the various arts, so the definitions of these terms overlap to some degree.”
I agree with Wikipedia that art is a broad subdivision of culture. If someone comments that you are very artistic in ancient India, you would most probably describe a very good sculpture but if someone says that to you in a cooking class, they would most probably be appreciating the good culinary skills the person has created to quench the eyes and taste buds of a beholder. I also realized that there are a lot of types of arts in this modern world which we may try to broadly classify.
Can Art Be Defined?
Secondly we look into an account by some world famous philosophers’ say on art in a book I found in our very own Shaw library. This argument totally defies the definition I found in Wikipedia.
“There is an immense variety among the works of art: paintings, plays, films, novels, pieces of music and dance may seem to have very little in common. This has led some philosophers that art cannot be defined at all. They claim that it is a complete mistake to look for a common denominator since there is just too much variety among the works of art for a definition which applies to them all to be satisfactory.”
The philosophers above used the ‘family resemblance view’ in the book “Philosophical Investigations” by Ludwig Wittgenstein to come to the argument. Let us have a look at the special view stated:
“You may look a little like your father, and your father may resemble his sister. However, it is possible that you look nothing like your father’s sister. In other words there may be overlapping resemblances between the different members of a family without there being one observable feature which they all share. Similarly, many games resemble each other, but it is difficult to see what solitaire, chess, rugby, and tiddlywinks have in common.
The resemblance in different types of art may be of this type: despite the obvious similarities between some works of art, there may be no observable features they all which they all share (no common denominator). If this is so, it is a mistake to look for any general definition of art. The best we can hope for is the definition of an art form like a novel, painting, a dish or a play.”
Looking at this argument I would not agree with them saying art works will not have anything at all in common after I read the second page of the book where they actually tried to contradict the previous page about the argument that there being no definition for art. We appreciate some form of art we are definitely linking to common thoughts of expressions. Hence there is something that connects between the creator and observer and that factor can define what the art means to both of them.
And to prove this view as false they rewrite their saying as:
“One way of proving this view false would be to produce a satisfactory definition of art. We will look at a number of attempts to do this. However, it is worth noting that even in the case of family resemblance there is something which all members of a family do have in common: the fact that they are genetically related. And all games all games resemble each other in that they have the potential to be absorbing non practical interest to players or spectators. Now, whilst this definition of games is rather vague, and not entirely satisfactory – it does not, for example, help us distinguish games from such activities as kissing or listening to music – it suggests that a more detailed and plausible definition could be found. If this could be done for games, there is no reason to rule out in advance the possibility of doing that for the works of art. Of course the common denominator of all works of art may not turn out to be particularly interesting or important, but it clearly might be possible to find one.”
Even I feel that art can be defined as there has to be a way for everything in the world to be called as thus, I went out to search for possible definitions and found a few in the internet and a few in some books Here they are(bibliography provided at the back in colour code):
- Art creates beauty. Art is the vanguard of taste, trumpeting fashion before it actually exists.
- Art is that human activity which consists in one human consciously conveying to others, by certain external signs, the feelings he has experienced, and in others being affected by those feelings and also experiencing them. .
- Objects created by humans that have aesthetic value or express symbolic meaning, including drawings, paintings, and sculpture.
- Art is a selective re-creation of reality according to an artist's metaphysical value-judgments. An artist recreates those aspects of reality which represent his fundamental view of man's nature. (Marcel Proust)
2007-05-01 02:35:27
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
Any art or creation that appeals to our senses and evokes ours emotions, (at the least it affects us in some way, may it be momentary) .. is a good art.
In case of modern art, even if we don't always understand what the artists is trying to say - the artist constructs an image or object that makes us think, makes us wonder, makes us question, and we try to find the meaning (if it's there, or even if it's not there). So, in a way that image or object placed strategically in a museum, 'affects' us and stimulates our mind. Now, modern art isn't always insensible. It has several aspects like playing with negative space and maintaining the aesthetics.
It's all about your control on your art and your skill as an artist, and your ability to feel and predict what your audience will feel. It's often a statement. And when we notice that statement, subconsciously, we relate to it because the message has come across (whether we agree with that statement or not, is a different matter).
When you take a picture of someone, its important that that picture is clear and well-lit, but that picture will become a great picture if you capture the mood and personality of that person. And that's a skill. It comes with knowledge of practice.
Apart from all this, it's always up to you, whether like a particular art or you don't. You can choose to interpret the meaning as it is or you can derive your own meaning. Art is art.:)
2007-04-29 06:33:41
·
answer #2
·
answered by ricci 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
It's just about opinion. "Great art" is something that you can connect with, and you feel has a deep meaning. What is great art to you isn't great art to someone else. To me, great art tells a story. You know, you look at a black and white photograph of a simple small town, and it's just saturated with feelings and emotions. Then you start to wonder about the little town. You can just imagine what goes on everyday, because it is captured so perfectly in the picture. It tells a story, with no words. Great art would leave you with a slightly different perspective or mood. For me, it makes me feel kinda sad and thoughtful. I always end up with my mind whirling with memories, but that's just me. Great art is what you say it is, not what the art historian a few doors down says.
2007-04-28 14:01:24
·
answer #3
·
answered by R. 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
There are two kinds of good in the art world. There is popular and then there is critical analyzes by "professional" critics. Sometimes they are the same, and sometimes the view changes. One of the most historic changes was the movie Citizen Kane. When it first came out, it was bashed by every critic that saw the movie. Now Citizen Kane often is considered the best movie ever on some movie critic lists.
2007-04-28 14:01:15
·
answer #4
·
answered by gregory_dittman 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
The seen arts are artwork varieties that concentration on the advent of works that are commonly seen in nature, which contain portray, pictures, printmaking, and filmmaking. the present utilization of the term "seen arts" includes nice arts besides as crafts, yet this became no longer continually the case.
2016-12-28 03:16:36
·
answer #5
·
answered by ? 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
If when you view it it stops your mind. Time stops and so do your thoughts--you are transfigured, transformed and transmogrified. A true zen moment. It changes your life, substantially. See for example "Six Persimmons" by Mu Chi.
If your are not transfixed, go back to NASCAR reruns on TV.;)))))
2007-04-28 15:39:17
·
answer #6
·
answered by drakke1 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
one that expresses feeling
2007-04-28 13:52:23
·
answer #7
·
answered by guitarrockerdude2 1
·
0⤊
0⤋