Comments | zerozero: It appears to be a rant.

zerozero

It appears to be a rant.

Sep 05, 2002 06:43

Philosophers can disagree about conclusions reached from assumptions made but no matter how ill conceived an argument might be people don't say "the ideas are bad so therefore he is not a philosopher" value judgements are present but poorly constructed philosophy is still philosophy. A mathematical formula without a proof is still maths. A ( Read more... )

Comments 23

flashgordon September 5 2002, 02:11:47 UTC

You are a fantastic writer, you know that? In the 5 mins it took to read that I have been completely transformed. I agree with everything you say =)

Re: zerozero September 5 2002, 04:13:20 UTC

i blush.

inflammatio September 5 2002, 10:19:55 UTC

I agree. He is one of the most profound and well-versed writers I know in person.

crypx September 5 2002, 04:00:23 UTC

Evaluating art in terms of money is a completely different thing to evaluating art for arts sake.
Which has reminded me of my money rant that has yet to see outside my head.

art in terms of money / evaluating art for arts sake zerozero September 6 2002, 01:22:12 UTC

for good or ill the two go hand in hand. The rant about that is far from over, but i also have a money rant brewing... we can compare notes.

Re: art in terms of money / evaluating art for arts sake crypx September 8 2002, 18:32:42 UTC

As soon as art is up for sale, it becomes a product and is defined by all the same laws as any other product. This means that date, 'brand' name, condition, history, and all those other factors change the price. Personally I've never thought of a chest of drawers as art, but in auction they are treated as so. Or is it art that is being treated like a chest of drawers?
Where do you draw the line between art and craft? I get the impression that for you there isn't one.
honesty and intent your currency?
Idealist.
If no one appreciates the art of something, is it still art?

thirteen_oclock September 5 2002, 06:35:05 UTC

The smallest little sketches from great artists, before they developed their ability properly, whether good or bad, seem to fetch thousands in auction houses such as Sotherby's. And whether or not a piece of art is good often does not matter as to whether it is displayed or deemed of any importance because its often the signature that counts, and with that the price, so I can see what you mean about art gallerys. I personally find them quite cold and sterile, while a lot of art which I find personally much more pleasing can be deemed worthless and as you say, "not art". I think that every piece of art is unique, and every style used is so different, that it shouldn't simply be judged against what is the accepted "good".

Without the rambling, I agree with you.

Art is alot like people I think.

dj_alexander September 5 2002, 07:42:05 UTC

Everything is technically art on some level. It's really just the presentation.

See a dog turd on the street and be disgusted. So it framed under a spotlight in a gallery and appreciate the post modernistic irony of the thing.

Or something.

zerozero September 6 2002, 03:26:28 UTC

for the true post modernist touch you would have to put the spotlight on the turd in situ and have people come too see it on the pavement.

The irony would be when you sell it to satchi & he pays pays 5 million quid for a pile of shit.

dawnage September 6 2002, 04:28:18 UTC

I believe that art is everywhere and everything is art, and it's value depends entirely on what the individual can get from it.

This is despite me having worked in an art gallery surrounded by works from some of the most "important" artists of the last two centuries... although it makes sense that pieces by such artists have a high financial value as they have a fairly broad appeal.

I always thought... st8ofemergency September 5 2002, 09:43:35 UTC

... that as long as before it is created, as long as the intent is to create a piece of art, then it is art, no matter what it is, or how "bad" it is.

Re: I always thought... zerozero September 6 2002, 03:27:16 UTC

tho apparently not clear enough in my post, that was what i meant to say.

Re: I always thought... st8ofemergency September 6 2002, 08:27:49 UTC

Ah, I'm sorry I didn't get that. That's probably my fault though.

Re: I always thought... crypx September 8 2002, 18:40:18 UTC

Finally worked out why this 'what is art' topic is familiar .. Was with art students or friends of, and it is defined as 'with intent'. Stories of a girl going shopping with her pot plant... Although I personally disagree with the intent idea .. art is what happens when you're not looking.