On 8/22/07, graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Ah, so only you know if something is art?
No, only ~I~ know if it feels like art ~to me~, You are free to decide if it's art to you. So are critics and the creators of pieces are free to decide if something's art to ~them~. Everyone, at any time is free to decide on the "artfulness" of anything. I wouldn't dare to decide something on your behalf. > And if it is not art to you it is crap? When did I say that? A creator may feel that a piece is art, critics may decide that a piece is art, most viewers may feel that a piece is art, and I may disagree insofar as a piece doesn't move me to feel it's art. I don't discount the feelings of the others. Neither must I conclude for myself that whatever it is is crap. To take the example I gave earlier, Canadian illustrator Trisha Romance: I personally don't consider her work (that I've seen) "art". It just doesn't move me. I can, however, appreciate that her work may be technically competent, and that it may, on some level, be "pretty", and have lovely pastel colours. I simply find it completely unmoving. That doesn't mean I think it's crap. I'm sure they'd look quite nice in a doctor's office, or on a living room wall of someone who likes it. I'd never hang one in my home, but that doesn't mean I think it's "crap". > On the other hand I will give you an example of something I think was good > art. In a >waiting room was this rather banal looking painting of a small > fishing town on a stormy >day. As I sat there waiting my appointment I became > more and more depressed. After a >bit I realized it was the painting; the > artist had caught the weather and rather run down >state of the fishing > village so well the sense of depression that you did not even notice in >the > first look transferred itself to you own mind. That is good art, where the > artist can >transfer his emotional state about the image to the viewer. I > would not for the life of me >have that painting in my living room however. I > always sat with my back to the painting >after that. I'm glad the piece that you saw became appreciated by you as art. I think you're agreeing with me, though, Graywolf! It seems that you're saying that it didn't seem artful to you at first, then as you looked at it, you gradually made a connection with it (and possibly the artist), and ~to you~ the piece became art. cheers, frank -- "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept." -Henri Cartier-Bresson -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
