What is art?

truth
I can't say what art IS, beyond reciting a dictionary definition. But I can say that, IMO, the creation and appreciation of beauty (broadly defined) is one of the justifications for existence.

I always loved this one


science is a discipline pursued with passion
art is a passion pursued with discipline

Well, I have a question then, is it art if no one appreciates its inherent beauty?

Art is more than a drawing, painting, sculpture or music composition...it is something beautiful that moves you emotionally.

Kickycan
Kickycan, your question has been answered on the following site:

http://pages.ivillage.com/Gaius_Mohaim/whatisart/

BBB

Thanks BBB, but I was more interested in hearing what people on this site think art is. What art is to you, personally. I appreciate the effort though.

truth
Scoates, it seems to me that if NOONE, not even the artist, appreciates a work, it is either not art, or it is a work of failed art. We must remember that art is a profoundly subjective phenomenon--it lives in the realm of deep subjectivity. As such, it must move SOMEONE subjectively. Otherwise it has no place to exist as art. It doesn't matter how many people are not moved by it, so long as some people are. It might only be appreciated by the artist, in which case it IS a work of successful art at least for that person.

I don't think it has to be beautiful, though it usually is.

It is a means of communication and can also be used to express distressing and emotional thoughts that don't make a work of beauty but do make a great work of art. I'm thinking here of Guernica by Picasso and some of Kathe Kollowitz work. Very powerful but not beautiful in a pretty sense.

truth
Agreed, Vivien. It's vital that we not confound beauty and prettiness.

I think of beauty as a concept with more breadth than surface prettiness includes.. I think beauty involves some kind of "fit", thus Guernica, and other works not immediately beautiful in the pretty way still have beauty to me, since Guernica, et al, have "fit". Now, defining fit is another thing.

I have written on this before, but, hah, forget what I said.

Back in a bit.

Art is in the eye of the beholder.

Goodness, Vivien, that's exactly what my response was!

osso - difficult to define isn't it?

Yes, Vivien. I'm not even going to try to look up what I said in some discussion before, and I remember laboring over that one. JL was in that discussion, and a fellow named A.d.rian, and a lot of other folks over at abuzz. Looking up old topics of mine there would take hours and hours.

My sense of fit has to do with, uh, rightness, rightness being a kind of lining up, of elements. And lining up not meaning in a line but in a relationship to others. So I combine composition, which also has to do with relationships, with content, and the content can be abstract and/or figurative - talking about painting here - joined by felicity of technique, felicity encompassing even brutish strokes, kind of like beauty being able to be horrifying. Then I need, personally, a way into the "picture". And I would like some nod to the push pull of light and dark, and motion and stillness. And I want all those matters to "fit" as a whole.

Geez, riffing on what I would like to see in a painting, making it up as I go along. And what of sculpture and music - perhaps much the same.

truth
Osso, sounds like the spirit of what you said. If it isn't what you said, it's what you should have said.

yes osso and a balance of quiet and busy areas, the way colours work to create a mood or emotion .....

so many elements can be important

truth
Osso, I just re-read your statement above again. Very well expressed, a veritable art lesson by itself.

Well, that was off the cuff, but it reflects something of what I mean about fit. But art can be defined quite broadly, encompassing performance art, conceptual art, light installations, on and on.. still I think fit fits. I don't exactly mean balance of elements either, since some lack of balance can be involved with movement...

ah, just talkin.

When I see a painting of sculpture or any other art form and find it intriguing I believe that it is the sould of the artist speaking directly to me.

That art cannot be defined is what makes it exist as art. Art historians provide some definitions and categories of art do exist but there is no real authority over the effects the viewing of something an individual sees. Only that individuals perception is viable for that individual.

Opinion is simply opinion and each person has the right to accept or reject an art object. And I think that is how it should be.