Would you consider this to be art? | Page 3 | INFJ Forum

Would you consider this to be art?

Is it art?

  • Total voters
    21
Black Sheep said:
Not a chicken.....with its crazy hair and its music......
204387584_d2a026e640.jpg
Click to expand...

I thought that was a messed up cat with a fish on its face for a second...*clears throat* moving on!
so Anywho, I do not consider it art. Art is not just skill to me, it is skillfully allowing people to view some truth about the world in a different way. I know this definition needs a LOT of work, because otherwise we will get people making glasses with tinted lenses and saying: Look art! It was skillfully done and now people can see the world in a new way!
To me, this is creative, but not artistic and yes I know this is a subjective drawing of lines... I'll work on it.
 
Optimist said:
I thought that was a messed up cat with a fish on its face for a second...*clears throat* moving on!
so Anywho, I do not consider it art. Art is not just skill to me, it is skillfully allowing people to view some truth about the world in a different way. I know this definition needs a LOT of work, because otherwise we will get people making glasses with tinted lenses and saying: Look art! It was skillfully done and now people can see the world in a new way!
To me, this is creative, but not artistic and yes I know this is a subjective drawing of lines... I'll work on it.
Click to expand...

aren't creative and artistic the same thing?
 
Mother and child walking in a park

Child:"Mom look! There's somebody in the lake we should call for help!"
Mother:"Oh no, sweetheart! It's just Art. :]"






What a great time and place to raise children. My kids will grow up to have great values, I can't wait.
 
i find graffiti to be repulsive and garish, not to mention incredibly disrespectful to someone else's property, but it's still art nonetheless. misplaced in my eye, but in exactly the right place to the graffiti artist's eye, because the very nature of graffit is rebellious, loud, and disrespectful.
displaying these bodies in public places without prior warning is about the same reaction for me. if it were in a place that defined it as art, say in a gallery, museum, art show in the park etc. it wouldn't offend me at all. i could choose to ponder on it or ignore it.
same with graffiti. if it's done in the proper place it's mesmerizing. (by proper place i mean that someone has commissioned an artist to do a side of their building or something)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Odyne
There is an unhealthy trend in the arts where people confuse "shocking" with "creative." So we get nonsense like violent lyrics, masturbation moves on stage, or a crucifix in urine. These photos depict attempts to shock. There is no creativity.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Odyne
Art is something that makes us think or feel so yes it is art

In fact everything is potentially art

The question still remains (originally raised by Craig i think) however over whether or not it is responsible to have that kind of art in a public place. I would argue its not suitable.

It does however challenge the viewer and through their response to it hold a mirror up to the perceptions of our times

Art can be happy, sad, uplifting, disturbing etc because it is a reflection of life and life is all those things

The art i tend to like is art that has something to say, that is questioning the way things are and in that sense art is often highly revolutionary, because everytime a mind questions the status quo a mini revolution has happened
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back