April 19th, 2006


Previous Entry Next Entry
12:48 am - on the arts, time and world civilization...

(22 comments | Leave a comment)

 
on the arts, time and world civilization... - graffiti.maverick

• Recent Entries
• Friends
• Archive
> ChrisMaverick dot com
• profile


Art & Photography
> 365 Days of Mav
> Elseworld.com
> Mav's Flickr Stream
> MavTV (youtube)
> Party Nook

Wrestling
> International Males
> IWC Wrestling
> BDW Wrestling
> CWF Wrestling

Other
> 1KWFFH
> Mav's DVD Library
> Verdandi (currently down)
> Mav's Schedule (currently down)
> Mav's MySpace
chrismaverick. Get yours at flagrantdisregard.com/flickr

Comments:


[User Picture]From: kenoubi Date: April 20th, 2006 - 12:34 pm (Link)
Well, first off, most “artists” would definitely consider some things to be art that I think are very marginal examples—“found art”, for example, which I think might well be less artistic than your average five-year-old's crayon drawing. So, I don't necessarily think that's a reliable guide.

You could have simply written the sentence “I hate the Gulf War” instead of painting an image to express it. So, the painting might be art, but it clearly isn't art solely in virtue of expressing that sentiment; the sentence does that too, and it isn't art. Something else has to be what makes the painting artistic, and I'd say that that something else is those attributes of the painting that would make it valuable on its own merit.

Fundamentally, the expressive view of art has never been very compelling to me. Sure, most art does express something (and perhaps all art could be “interpreted” as expressing something), but too many things that aren't art express things also for that to be what makes art distinctive.
[User Picture]From: chrismaverick Date: April 20th, 2006 - 08:52 pm (Link)
that's actually pretty insightful. So you're saying that art can have meaning or not, but that's not the distinguishing factor. I actually like that a lot.
 

• Go to Top
LiveJournal.com