Please! Don't start also! I mean, Pop is a nice guy (girl?) but one pop is more than enough... :grin: — Thunderballs
Art is an umbrella term,a flexible word for expressions that are beautiful,funny or entertaining. Inspiring racous passionate!
It's obviously subjective ( as are all things!) But there is a lot of intersubjective agreement. ( for honest people! )
To say art is information without recourse to talking about feelings and aesthetics is the height of anti artistry!
The OP is boring,banal,non artistic,the definitional opposite of art! And far worse than duchamps urinal!
Art is an overwhelming expression of desire and ideology!
Anti art AKA shit art is science most politics and most philosophical discourse!!! Banal wannabe scribbling!
Finally,for the real artists in this thread (!!!) there are two types of art. "Cruel art" and FUN Art.
Cruel art is the bible,nietzsche,Greek tragedy.
Fun Art is Karl Krauss,all great comics,all great Satirists all Love Poets.
Scientists,philosophers,linguists,political administrators,academics,keep your dirty definitional hands off art! You know shit about art!!!
Your expressions and definitions are the excrement of your Soul!!! Passionless piss! — Gogol
Cool to hear someone describe it this way, as being creative is so commonly only associated with the arTIST. — praxis
Incidentally Pop, I can be pretty plain spoken and direct. Some can be offended. You handle this very well. — Constance
the medium is just the catalyst, the vehicle through which art is communicated. — Constance
See Dewey's Art as Experience — Constance
But the real event is interior, in the interpretative milieu of mind. Also, you would need to identify what this essence is. Is it form? And what is meaning as an aesthetic idea, not what language produces fit for a dictionary. — Constance
The reason I am saying this is that art is certainly NOT information in its essence. — Constance
And what does predicting something have to do with defining art? Does this mean with your theory, an object that comes up can be measured by a reliable standard to make the determination as to whether it is art or not? How? — Constance
But why do you think the analysis of the nature of art rests with organizing? — Constance
This could use some explaining, don't you think? — praxis
It issues from what is always already there. — Constance
I agree, but would add that art usually has a frame around it, or a museum to hold it, a display case over it, etc. Something to hand it forward for the consideration of the audience.
You can put your own invisible frame around the lines on the highway if you like, I suppose, but then it's your own private art. — frank
The way I see it, the pothole in front of my house is a nuisance and an obstacle to my daily affairs … we forget it's art. It's a rug. — Constance
The "artwork" lies in taking something AS art. But then the final question remains a mystery: what is it to take something as art? — Constance
"Does the quality of an artwork reside in the art work itself, or in the mind of the observer, or artist?" — Pop
Summary
For both postmodernism and modernism, as the meaning of any artwork resides in the mind of the artist or observer and not the artwork, and as quality is a mental concept, then the quality of the artwork resides not in the artwork but in the mind of the artist, or observer — RussellA
The "artwork" lies in taking something AS art. But then the final question remains a mystery: what is it to take something as art? — Constance
Does a work not provide the observer's mind with something to consider? — Tom Storm
I agree, but would add that art usually has a frame around it, or a museum to hold it, a display case over it, etc. Something to hand it forward for the consideration of the audience.
You can put your own invisible frame around the lines on the highway if you like, I suppose, but then it's your own private art. — frank
In systems theory what is always there - what is common to all systems, is self organization.
In information theory, it is information that self organizes. In Yogic logic this self organizing element present in everything is consciousness.
I have said art work is information about an artists consciousness, and I have defined consciousness as an evolving process of self organization. So art work is an expression of the artists evolving process of self organization. This IS the something that is always there. There are no other somethings always there. All the other somethings are variable, and open ended - and continually emerging.
I think we just misunderstand each other rather then disagree. Perhaps disagree on expressive style. — Pop
Vaguely — praxis
From a Deweyan viewpoint, aesthetic experience, then, has roughly the following structure. The experience is set off by some factors, such as opening a book, directing a first glance at a painting, beginning to listen to a piece of music, entering a natural environment or a building, or beginning a meal or a conversation. As aesthetic experience is temporal, the material of the experience does not remain unchanged, but the elements initiating the experience, like reading the first lines of a book or hearing the first chord of a symphony, merge into new ones as the experience proceeds and complex relationships are formed between its past and newer phases. When these different parts form a distinctive kind of orderly developing unity that stands out from the general experiential stream of our lives, the experience in question is aesthetic.
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.