Comments on: Drawing Conclusions http://www.dissentdecree.net/2009/12/24/drawing-conclusions/ Fri, 02 Jul 2010 18:49:34 -0600 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 By: Mike http://www.dissentdecree.net/2009/12/24/drawing-conclusions/comment-page-1/#comment-825 Mike Thu, 31 Dec 2009 15:32:41 +0000 http://www.dissentdecree.net/?p=925#comment-825 Trying to define Art is a lot like trying to define Love. We all acknowledge it exists but have our own understandings of what it is. That said, art to be art requires human intention and recognition. The person making it does it purposely--not necessarily thinking "this is art," but at least aware that they are making something subject to their judgments of taste--what works and doesn't--a sense of the aesthetic. Art simply does not exist in nature. Beauty exists in nature but only as it recognized by humans according their concepts of beauty. Nature has no subjective mind that says to it, "I nature will organize this according to a set of aesthetic principles." We ascribe beauty to nature. Of course, art need not be beautiful to be art. Art can be about truths that are in fact ugly to confront. Think of Goya's "The Third of May." It is also fair to say that skill and taste in art can be refined. A young child cannot be expected to appreciate a Goya, Rembrandt or Pollock painting beyond the most superficial level. They will certainly react, at a gut level, to line, color, texture and form, but they will lack the life experience to more fully appreciate the meanings and skill inherent in the works. . Trying to define Art is a lot like trying to define Love. We all acknowledge it exists but have our own understandings of what it is. That said, art to be art requires human intention and recognition. The person making it does it purposely–not necessarily thinking “this is art,” but at least aware that they are making something subject to their judgments of taste–what works and doesn’t–a sense of the aesthetic.

Art simply does not exist in nature. Beauty exists in nature but only as it recognized by humans according their concepts of beauty. Nature has no subjective mind that says to it, “I nature will organize this according to a set of aesthetic principles.” We ascribe beauty to nature. Of course, art need not be beautiful to be art. Art can be about truths that are in fact ugly to confront. Think of Goya’s “The Third of May.”

It is also fair to say that skill and taste in art can be refined. A young child cannot be expected to appreciate a Goya, Rembrandt or Pollock painting beyond the most superficial level. They will certainly react, at a gut level, to line, color, texture and form, but they will lack the life experience to more fully appreciate the meanings and skill inherent in the works.

.

]]> By: jeanie http://www.dissentdecree.net/2009/12/24/drawing-conclusions/comment-page-1/#comment-824 jeanie Thu, 31 Dec 2009 01:37:15 +0000 http://www.dissentdecree.net/?p=925#comment-824 I've long pondered the confusion of the word "art." But ultimately, I find its definition subjective. We say something is "good art" or "bad art," yet my judgment may be completely the reverse of yours! We argue, "Is it art or craft?" As if one is better than the other. I find art everywhere, in everyday life. It isn't just the things we make with artist supplies. It's the way we work with words, set the table, devise a recipe or add a personal spin to an existing one. Some will copy until they are comfortable enough to fly with their own modifications and then creations. Others will never be able to do that, but does that make what they have created -- improvised or otherwise -- less? I think not. And I agree with you. Tim's work IS art. I’ve long pondered the confusion of the word “art.” But ultimately, I find its definition subjective. We say something is “good art” or “bad art,” yet my judgment may be completely the reverse of yours! We argue, “Is it art or craft?” As if one is better than the other.

I find art everywhere, in everyday life. It isn’t just the things we make with artist supplies. It’s the way we work with words, set the table, devise a recipe or add a personal spin to an existing one. Some will copy until they are comfortable enough to fly with their own modifications and then creations. Others will never be able to do that, but does that make what they have created — improvised or otherwise — less?

I think not. And I agree with you. Tim’s work IS art.

]]>