[QUOTE=Jo The Shmo;33724179]just because something looks nice doesn't make it art
art has a certain meaning and purpose in everything that went into it, while this just performs a function[/QUOTE]
art doesn't have to be anything... thats why it's art
If it was made with the intent of being art, then yeah, it's art.
Unless it looks like shit.
[QUOTE=Falchion;33747697]Unless it looks like shit.[/QUOTE]
What about modern "art"?
[QUOTE=Ardosos;33747702]What about modern "art"?[/QUOTE]
what about modern art
[QUOTE=thisispain;33747726]what about modern art[/QUOTE]
Some of that can look asthetically displeasing yet by definition it is classified as "art".
[QUOTE=Ardosos;33747758]Some of that can look asthetically displeasing yet by definition it is classified as "art".[/QUOTE]
ok well that's the definition of art
is there a problem because i'm not seeing it
[QUOTE=thisispain;33747771]ok well that's the definition of art
is there a problem because i'm not seeing it[/QUOTE]
Nevermind then.
[QUOTE=mugofdoom;33747677]If it was made with the intent of being art, then yeah, it's art.[/QUOTE]
even stuff that's made with the intent of not being art is still art
[QUOTE=thisispain;33747771]ok well that's the definition of art
is there a problem because i'm not seeing it[/QUOTE]
Looking aesthetically displeasing is not the definition of art....
Try google at least. If you've ever had a philosophy class or a truly engaging conversation on the topic at least once, you'll discover there isn't a textbook definition as to what is or isn't art.
[url]http://www.google.com/search?q=art+definition&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a[/url]
For you to look through.
I'm not trying to be rude, I'm just saying that any philosophy class seems to hit the discussion of what is/is not art. Also, many people's views on art are different, so having a conversation about it will show you that. Sorry if I seemed rude.
[QUOTE=Archonos 2;33747963]Looking aesthetically displeasing is not the definition of art....
Try google at least. If you've ever had a philosophy class or a truly engaging conversation on the topic at least once, you'll discover there isn't a textbook definition as to what is or isn't art.
[url]http://www.google.com/search?q=art+definition&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&client=firefox-a[/url]
For you to look through.
I'm not trying to be rude, I'm just saying that any philosophy class seems to hit the discussion of what is/is not art. Also, many people's views on art are different, so having a conversation about it will show you that. Sorry if I seemed rude.[/QUOTE]
so you took one philosophy class and suddenly you've decided you can take out the big dawg.
i don't need to google the definition of art because i know it. it's an expression of something via the vehicle of artistic means. anyone who argues different becomes lost in the semantics of aesthetics which would just become the speed way to cultural snobbery.
sooo any one else just not care about defining art? it feels pretty pointless to me
you don't really have to care for it, because the definition is so simple and is common sense. if you think about it more abstractly, that's where it starts to enter the realm of philosophy and mindfuckness.
Everything is art.
Just like everything is nice or/and bad.
It is your damn taste.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
