On Tue, 10 Aug 2010 17:57:08 +0200 lordkrandel <[email protected]> wrote:
> Art also has an objectively undefinable function, so you can't decide > what a functional art form is. Simplicity is one arbitrary choice. I'll let Uriel describe the value of the idea that ‘art [] has an objectively undefinable function’; his vocabulary is better suited to that task than mine. I will, however, point out one consequence of that idea: the most noticeable difference between abstract art and abstract mathematics is that abstract mathematics has some aesthetic value. Abstract art can now consist of a canvas painted one color, or mere splatters of paint (or other substances) on a surface; contrast that with the Mandelbrot and Julia sets, or the Hilbert and Peano space-filling curves and von Koch snowflake, or the elegant complexity which arises from the simple axioms of group theory. A pure mathematician does his work to satisfy his curiosity; an abstract artist does his work merely to see what he can get away with. I will also point out that a game does have a function -- to be fun. > I like Mozart and Minimalism just as much as I like Dadaism or free > Jazz, even if they have different forms and subjective functions. I hope you aren't suggesting that Mozart *is* minimalist. Robert Ransom
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
