and being a product of effort doesn't automatically make it forced.
Art to me is humans attempting to harness and replicate the perfection they perceive around themselves in nature, and if it were just something that could result solely from a burst of inspiration, I think that would be considered nature, and not art (because nature is inherently without purpose or intent).
no. some people may express their art this way but that is far from a universal truth. there are thousands of reasons people create art and sometimes it is literally the complete opposite of that. sometimes people create art as an attempt to harness and replicate the flaws and the filth they perceive around themselves, whether it be in nature, social spheres, psychological make up or even political spheres and express that in something that may be grotesque or beautiful. and as i already said it doesnt 'solely' come as any one sort of act, but it can come in a burst of inspiration, and that doesnt necessarily make it 'nature' either, as nature cant inherently be described as simply as 'without purpose or intent' either.
|
| |
grotesque or beautiful
[or even both]
|
| |
maybe harness wasnt the right word, maybe simply the comment on the natural world around them and the place of human constructions within that environment.
i still stand by my original idea though, i dont think "effortless" art exists and is more or less a fallacy perpetuated by a lack of understanding of the artistic process (the whole effort vs. forced is an argument over semantics because i take them to mean functionally the same thing).
|
| |
the issue under question isn't whether effortless art exists though and it never was, its the issue of whether or not all art is 'forced' so i guess our entire discussion is built around semantics since you take them to mean the same thing and I definitely don't. Of course there is effort involved even under the grace of a movement of inspired fluidity, you can't just lay there motionless and will an art to be, naturally you have to make it. so i can concede that that aspect was a misunderstanding but i still very much disagree with your seemingly singular approach to arts purpose and intent
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.0
Excellent review, mate! I'm listening now. Stoked to hear this and the rest of the project.
Dear STAFF, can someone please fix the artwork for Andrew Bird's LP from last year? Thxu
|
| |
i dont think ive yet commented on whether or not i think art has a purpose, im just saying exactly what you just said, you cant just sit motionless and will art into existence, by virtue of being a product of the human will it is inherently forced into the world.
i dont think art has a purpose, or rather that it doesnt need one. art is simply an extension of the human will, all other meaning tacked on to it is transient and subjective.
|
| |
im just saying exactly what you just said, you cant just sit motionless and will art into existence, by virtue of being a product of the human will it is inherently forced into the world.
i know, we just established that we were in agreement on that and that we were just arguing semantics over what you meant by 'forced'.
i dont think ive yet commented on whether or not i think art has a purpose,
i dont think art has a purpose, or rather that it doesnt need one. art is simply an extension of the human will, all other meaning tacked on to it is transient and subjective.
i dont disagree with any of that but when you said this;
I think that would be considered nature, and not art (because nature is inherently without purpose or intent)
you seemed to be insinuating that art can't be purposeless or unintentional which is simply not true. and also that i disagree that nature is inherently a purposeless and intentless thing, whether you are talking about nature as the physical realm or nature as the nature of things
|
| |
well that depends on whether or not you consider human beings or any other form of sentient life a part of nature, which i dont really know if i have a fully formed opinion on.
hopefully sowing finds this discussion enlightening.
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.0
I've always thought of art as any product of self expression. It can be painstakingly slaved over, or relatively effortless. It doesn't matter. So in theory, all music is art. I just wanted to hammer home the idea that Andrew Bird focuses on that artistic side of music creation, not the sales and listenability of it all.
|
| |
idk, all that matters is that i can interpret something in an artistic sense. i don't care that much how it came about. years of work, or the product of an accident, w/e.
the question i have is: does art have to be man-made? if i can apply artistic meaning to something that had no initial 'purpose', can it never be considered art? (not trying to argue any points, i'm just curious what the thoughts are here)
|
| |
gotcha. ive always considered art to be anything made with the expressed intent of being art.
thats really the only way ive ever been able to circumvent the inherent subjectivity of art and
put it into words. its basically saying anything can be are without saying everything is
art.
but i definitely understand more so now what you meant by that last line. still think the art for
this is gorgeous and im definitely gonna give it a listen.
|
| |
So in theory, all music is art.
yes. and as you said some art is extremely commercialized, as is some music.
does art have to be man-made? if i can apply artistic meaning to something that had no initial 'purpose', can it never be considered art?
no it does not and yes it can, definitely.
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.0
Art is the output, not the input. Someone can create something not intending for it to be art, and have it turn out to be anyway.
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.0
Or conversely, someone can have the intention of making art even if the result is not perceived that way by most.
|
| |
cool conversation team
|
| |
Well art really has no objective definition. I believe it is highly subjective to both the artist of the
work and the public enjoying it.
|
| |
Album Rating: 3.0
"...the quality, production, expression, or realm, according to aesthetic principles, of what is beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance."
There we are, folks. Dictionary has spoken.
|
| |
the dictionary is outdated however.
|
| |
what is art? Let's consult a dictionary.
Maybe next we consult dictionary on the meaning of life as well ;)
|
| |
agreed
|
| |
|
|
