Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Art is Fundamentally Social (2021)

aaronhertzmann.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 32 posts

Re: Art is Fundamentally Social (2021)

#21

Post by tartoran »

Self taught painter here who produces hundreds of works yearly without showing out to the world. I am enjoying the process of making art and the idea of showing selling has been pushed out because socializing takes too much energy leaving me with less for actual art making. There is an idea of maybe one day doing it full time, idea which will require some marketing and selling some work unless I get lucky in another way and can retire from full time programming.

However, there is a social aspect. Few people saw my work and were moved by some works which I immediately gifted to them. It felt like a full circle connecting: I enjoyend the process which generated the artwork but once done I no longer needed them and accumulating works is hard if you’re poor. When given out to someone it feels like a healthy purge.

Re: Art is Fundamentally Social (2021)

#23

Post by zasdffaa »

andrepd wrote: post #20
jack_riminton wrote: post #7

I fundamentally disagree with the premise that all art is social Kurt Vonnegut expressed this better than I ever could in a letter to schoolkids, in it he persuaded them to write a poem then tear it into pieces without showing anyone.. "you'll find that you've already been gloriously rewarded for your poem. You have experienced becoming" Full letter here: https://highexistence.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/1053653..…

Those kids, and any artist, are if nothing else affected by their environment and the culture they experience, at a fundamental and largely unconscious level. So even the most reclusive artist is in a dialogue: with all the artists of the past several millenia ;)

> even the most reclusive artist is in a dialogue: with all the artists of the past several millenia

It's not a dialogue if they're dead.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialogue

Re: Art is Fundamentally Social (2021)

#24

Post by pier25 »

andrepd wrote: post #20
jack_riminton wrote: post #7

I fundamentally disagree with the premise that all art is social Kurt Vonnegut expressed this better than I ever could in a letter to schoolkids, in it he persuaded them to write a poem then tear it into pieces without showing anyone.. "you'll find that you've already been gloriously rewarded for your poem. You have experienced becoming" Full letter here: https://highexistence.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/1053653..…

Those kids, and any artist, are if nothing else affected by their environment and the culture they experience, at a fundamental and largely unconscious level. So even the most reclusive artist is in a dialogue: with all the artists of the past several millenia ;)

No man is an island, true, but it's quite a leap from that to "art is fundamentally social".

And then there's another deep discussion about what is actually art. I would argue if an artist is motivated by social factors to make art, they are not really making art.

Re: Art is Fundamentally Social (2021)

#25

Post by teucris »

pier25 wrote: post #24
andrepd wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those kids, and any artist, are if nothing else affected by their environment and the culture they experience, at a fundamental and largely unconscious level. So even the most reclusive artist is in a dialogue: with all the artists of the past several millenia ;)

No man is an island, true, but it's quite a leap from that to "art is fundamentally social". And then there's another deep discussion about what is actually art. I would argue if an artist is motivated by social factors to make art, they are not really making art.

Does that mean all commissioned work (which is a ton of the work that hangs in museums) is not really art?

Re: Art is Fundamentally Social (2021)

#26

Post by teucris »

jack_riminton wrote: post #7

I fundamentally disagree with the premise that all art is social Kurt Vonnegut expressed this better than I ever could in a letter to schoolkids, in it he persuaded them to write a poem then tear it into pieces without showing anyone.. "you'll find that you've already been gloriously rewarded for your poem. You have experienced becoming" Full letter here: https://highexistence.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/04/1053653..…

Why can’t it be both? Why can’t art that is fundamentally for yourself still be fundamentally social? The entirety of the concepts, techniques, themes, etc. in any art come from exterior influences; the complex web of humanity and our history. That is inherently social to me, even if the end result is never shared.

Re: Art is Fundamentally Social (2021)

#27

Post by stemlord »

pier25 wrote: post #24
andrepd wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Those kids, and any artist, are if nothing else affected by their environment and the culture they experience, at a fundamental and largely unconscious level. So even the most reclusive artist is in a dialogue: with all the artists of the past several millenia ;)

No man is an island, true, but it's quite a leap from that to "art is fundamentally social". And then there's another deep discussion about what is actually art. I would argue if an artist is motivated by social factors to make art, they are not really making art.

> if an artist is motivated by social factors to make art

Theres an entire subset of socializing/communal happenings as art called relational aesthetics tho

Re: Art is Fundamentally Social (2021)

#28

Post by dudeguy3301 »

hypertele-Xii wrote: post #17
dudeguy3301 wrote: post #6

lets not forget not too long ago art was a available only to the rich. the social elements were confined to the whim and contingency of the lords, aristocratics and nobles who deemed art to be so. as we may glean from walter benjamin, the reproducibility of art in a capitalist industry brought art to the 'people'. we now live in an age where 'art' and 'artists' are ubiquitous and available for 'everyone'. these socia…

Art has existed long before the rich became wealthy. The most ancient of cave-people collected shiny stones, painted walls, sang and danced, and crafted non-tool items like idols. > the reproducibility of art in a capitalist industry brought art to the 'people'. The Japanese were woodblock printing art for the masses since the 17th century. Woodblock printing itself is much older.

yesyes, both good responses. i suppose i was focusing on a type of art prevalent in classism. many types of art have existed for all peoples through out history. we call cave paintings 'art' but did those peoples who painted them have that conception? most likely not. although a deep generalization has threaded every human culture's expressions of art, there is always variation. indeed art has been for the people in many cultures and for a very very long time. i suppose i was more focused on the whole 20th century, 21st century, computer part of the article, which in fact i didnt really dive into at all.

Re: Art is Fundamentally Social (2021)

#29

Post by pier25 »

teucris wrote: post #25
pier25 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No man is an island, true, but it's quite a leap from that to "art is fundamentally social". And then there's another deep discussion about what is actually art. I would argue if an artist is motivated by social factors to make art, they are not really making art.

Does that mean all commissioned work (which is a ton of the work that hangs in museums) is not really art?

How is this related to what I wrote?

Re: Art is Fundamentally Social (2021)

#30

Post by pier25 »

stemlord wrote: post #27
pier25 wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No man is an island, true, but it's quite a leap from that to "art is fundamentally social". And then there's another deep discussion about what is actually art. I would argue if an artist is motivated by social factors to make art, they are not really making art.

> if an artist is motivated by social factors to make art Theres an entire subset of socializing/communal happenings as art called relational aesthetics tho

Maybe but I would ask what is the fundamental motivation.
Post reply on HN