What qualities do we find in cave drawings and paintings from prehistoric europse that classify them as art?

Question

Why are they considered art when people back then most likely had no concept of art.

Answer 1

All art (in any medium) simply seeks to convey a thought or feeling from the artist to the beholder. If nothing else, it is to convey an idea or a concept. As such, the ancient paintings from prehistory certainly qualify as 'art' and also provide us with a 'connection' to our long-ago relatives who had already developed some sense of 'art' and 'artistic value'.
You seem a bit too ready to dismiss anything that doesn't meet with your contemporary standards as indicating a lack on the part of the caveman. But, in another 50,000 years, we will probably seem just as backwards, childish, and uncivilized to our own descendents.

Or, perhaps, they will have evolved to the point that they can appreciate their roots and heritage.

Doug

Answer 2

Understand that without those ancient drawings, art as you know it today would not exist. Art is meant to convey a message of some kind, but it has other functions as well. Both then and today, art serves to invoke emotion. Art also in many ways captures a moment in time and preserves it. We take this for granted, but prehistoric people would have viewed their art as sacred and powerful magic. Art today functions the same, that's why we love it and create it. I would even go so far as to say that art has helped us to survive by providing a means for us to study and cope with an ever changing world. People in those times did have a concept of art, but it differs dramatically from ours today. And I'm sure our concept will continue to evolve just like the art we produce.

Answer 3

firstly, i think art is classified as the conveyance of a message from the creator of the art to their audience, regardless of the message or medium

i would think that in terms of prehistoric art, the use of perception by the artist, by painting a mammoth's tusks 5x bigger than they actually were in comparison to the actual animal, or drawing a tiny person next to an enormous animal that wouldn't be that big or a flight of fifty spears toward a fighting creature. this can be described as exaggeration, but i think that it could also be described as the message of the artist, by over embellishing on the actual scenario the artist relates the fear or challenge or success of the scenario. this therefore transfers the message and is therefore art.

Answer 4

they are not art

Answer 5

age!