71–80 of 88 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
By that definition seeking snake oil is also anything snake oil is because you are selling it as “not snake oil”.
Plenty of art is sold on the basis of the work it’s self. But, that doesn’t qualify as high art. The difference between what you’re paying 5k vs 500k is almost completely about the story around the art not the actual art on it’s own merits.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm pretty sure you can make art purely for yourself and never show it to anyone else.
You can make something , but what, then, makes it art? Or, to put that another way: if there is only one animal alive in a forest, and that animal produces noise intentionally, but has no organ for sensing noise, have they made a “sound”? Some words are only meaningful in the context of interpersonal communication. “Art” is, IMHO, one of them. Without an observer secondary to the artist, the question “is this art” ha…
If a masterpiece painting is created by a blind artist, never seen by anyone including himself for 500 years. Then it is discovered after 500 years. What is the status of this art through this timeline?
Art and beauty remain what they are irrespective of an audience.
Now, whether something is really art or beautiful, and who decides that are entirely different questions..
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One wonders if the impact is imparted not by the piece, then, but by the room. There are elements of physical texture and contrast present in physical works, but is the difference between the Mona Lisa and a high-quality print of the Mona Lisa the brushstrokes, or that one is in the Louvre?
Since it is painted in oil by Leonardo, yes, it is the brush strokes. "Mona Lisa, the precious legacy of Leonardo da Vinci, represents a zenith of methodological innovations in painting. How the painter managed to obtain such delicacy of the tonal transitions still occupies the mind of contemporary art researchers. Based on published results of scientific analyses performed on the painting and relying on historical s…
Today we'd say she went viral after that for no good reason.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can make something , but what, then, makes it art? Or, to put that another way: if there is only one animal alive in a forest, and that animal produces noise intentionally, but has no organ for sensing noise, have they made a “sound”? Some words are only meaningful in the context of interpersonal communication. “Art” is, IMHO, one of them. Without an observer secondary to the artist, the question “is this art” ha…
My working definition of "art": that which is created for the sufficient purpose of being perceived. This definition does not require the audience be not the artist. If one creates an instance for the sole purpose of being perceived by one's self alone, that is still art.
Art sure is more valuable once the artist is dead, from a dealers perspective.
As for what is "art" in general? Whatever you want it to be!
If you have to buy a book or go to school to figure it out, you just engaged in commerical / professional art, as a buyer. Back to commercial art we go.
Analogy: telephone is like real-life conversation -> chat is like telephone -> social media is like chat -> now look where we are.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Here is the example: https://i.pinimg.com/originals/1e/b2/b9/1eb2b9a2d656762f8bed... I agree that when printed on very large canvas and under proper lighting it can evoke some impression but the same would go for some computer generated art under similar conditions.
No print has the same physical presence as being able to see the layering of the paint on canvas. It's not a fully 2D medium.
Also I have no idea if it exists but nothing prohibits one to hook up simple plotter type robot to computer and have it make that physical presence real by using real brushes / spray and paint.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can make something , but what, then, makes it art? Or, to put that another way: if there is only one animal alive in a forest, and that animal produces noise intentionally, but has no organ for sensing noise, have they made a “sound”? Some words are only meaningful in the context of interpersonal communication. “Art” is, IMHO, one of them. Without an observer secondary to the artist, the question “is this art” ha…
My working definition of "art": that which is created for the sufficient purpose of being perceived. This definition does not require the audience be not the artist. If one creates an instance for the sole purpose of being perceived by one's self alone, that is still art.
Let me try my analogy again: if you’re the last human alive, and you invent a bunch of words used for thinking to yourself, are those a “language”? Or are they merely a verbal shorthand or formalism or mnemonic for your thought processes?
IMHO, the word “language” only has a meaning/application in the context of two or more agents speaking. It is a protocol to allow agents without exactly the same mind to share thoughts, by putting those thoughts into a standardized schema separate from one’s own internal mental schema. If only you (or you and emulated copies of yourself) are communicating, then you won’t need such a separate model—you can just transmit the internal schema data structures directly.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
and similar to NFTs the artists involved in early computer art also faced harassment "Indifferent as many critics and curators were, there were some responses to computer art that were considerably more severe. In fact, computer art has aroused the kind of extreme resentment that characterized many of the idolatry controversies scattered through the history of art. Beyond the sabotaging of computers, physical attacks…
> All sounds very similar to whats happening to a lot of artists thanks to Memo Akten's cryptoart.wtf name and shame site. I don’t think that’s fair. Artists should be aware of the impact of their work and that site served to educate a great number of people on the ecological harm of NFT art. That isn’t to say that those artists deserve to be harassed about it though.
He knew what he was doing and he knew how Twitter would react and people would be harassed for it.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Professional art is whatever you can sell as such. What i find boring with western art is that it is completely dependent on the critic and the discourse statement, in text, that must accompany any "serious" work of art. Zen and objects created under that philosophy makes no distinction between "high" and "low" art. There are multiple other approaches outside of the western paradigm. The writer of the article is sell…
Any piece of work that does not speak for itself, i dont consider art. The works of the great masters can be appreciated even by children. They speak for themselves.
If you learn the guy's name from the plaque next to the frame, and you know the word "saint" and are familiar with the reasons that title is applied, that probably gives you some impression that the knife is not going to be used to eat supper. (It's interesting to imagine viewing the and not knowing these things, in my opinion.) But only if you actually know St. Bart's (horrific) story do you understand the look on his face and really grasp the depth of Rembrandt's depiction.
This same problem applies to modern->contemporary art. In some cases the cultural context is, ironically, "people thought art should be produced for its own sake", which is harder to engage with if you happen to also not like the surface aesthetic. But it doesn't stop the artifacts from being art.
From the article: "Questions like 'is a computer creative' or 'is a computer an artist' or the like should not be considered serious questions, period." Interesting that the concept that the computer is somehow doing the art itself, missing the point that a computer is a tool just like a paintbrush, was even around in '71. One wonders when the paintbrush was invented if people argued people should still finger paint,…
A computer works with symbols. A brush works with marks. The latter is a larger infinity. It's like the difference between digital and analog. Or raster and vector. Or map and territory.
Likewise symbols and brushmarks. I can describe brushmarks that could never be physically realized.