Trigger words: Art rt ART (3) art
Indicator sentences: So you define "Art" by what is in a museum? by what some people will pay for something?
Negotiation parts: True, but why do you find Willem De Kooning's [Tree in Naples](http://imgur.com/4TGO0Ok) in a museum and worth millions of dollars, whereas the same thing made by a toddler wouldn't be there? They both look the same. So what makes one greater than the other? No, I define art as something that makes me feel something beyond what the object is. As I said in a reply to someone else: If someone painted a piece made of random splats entirely out of blood, I would be thinking about the blood, and the violence needed to get the blood. But paint randomly put on a canvas doesn't make me question anything like that. It's something a tiny child does, and has no greater meaning to anyone but the artist than something a toddler would make. So why is one held in such high regard, whereas we're not framing every toddler's painting? [STA-CITE]> No, I define art as something that makes me feel something beyond what the object is. [END-CITE]This is close to what I define art as. But then you go back to "regard".... Jackson Pollock splattered paint to give the viewer a "sense of the moment" both moments really... The moment of creation, and the moment of looking at it. My definition of "Art" is: being aware that you are seeing something beautiful. "Art" only means what you think it means. Not it means what you've read the "Artist" intended it to mean. Nor it only means something if people will pay a lot for it. I can be aware of beauty looking at a toddler's splatters, or even a toddler. Art doesn't even have to be an object. Art for me, is when I can notice and am aware of noticing beauty. ∆ I like this description. I suppose I just don't notice the beauty in art that all looks the same to me, especially that which doesn't have a historical significance or context. Similar to the way you'll stop seeing the beauty of the place you live after a while, the same thing probably happens with certain modern art styles. Though I will say that people who splat paint for no reason nowadays probably aren't doing it for the same revolutionary reasons that several artists did in the past.
Trigger words: Random random randomly
Indicator sentences: Yes but what is random? Random doesn't exist, there are always variables that carefully place every particle of every component of every artistic piece. The fact we don't know how these variable started or how they work means we call them "random", but there is something behind every pattern.
Negotiation parts: I agree most of these patterns are meaningless, valueless and if we find anything it's our imagination, but now and again something will trigger value. Most art is a copy with a small variant of something already made anyway.
Trigger words: art (3) work of art
Indicator sentences: By your definition, isn't everything a work of art?
Negotiation parts: If someone paints a bunch of splats, then it's just a bunch of splats. Then they call it art, and suddenly that makes it important, and the fact that it makes you question whether or not it actually is art becomes the art. But doesn't that mean I can do it with anything? I drink out of the same coffee cup every day. It has a stain in the bottom. It's not art, and I probably couldn't sell it because it's ruined. However, if I call it art, does that suddenly make it so? Is it suddenly worth lots of money? Can I do that with all my possessions and sell them off, proclaiming them to be art? Yes, I believe you are correct. That is how I see art. Anything can be art - any act, object, or abstract concept. If someone proclaims it is art then it is. You could attempt to sell off your possessions, claiming them to be art - but it would depend on subjective valuation on the viewer/purchaser if they were worth anything. This is, sometimes, how pieces make it into museums. The artist has their own intentions/meaning for the piece, then separate but sometimes dependent on that the original purchaser/viewer ascribes their own personal meaning/value. Then because they place it in a gallery or museum, that can add value to some other viewers, if that is what they value. Others will value it based on how it makes them feel, separate from the intent of the artist or the location/socially ascribed value of the piece, and others will not value it at all. Art is entirely subjective, that is the point. What is art is subjective, what is good art is subjective, and what is valuable is subjective. Someone pays for the art, you can sell whatever you made and say it is art, but someone has to want to buy it first How do YOU define "ART"? As I said in another reply: > I define art as something that makes me feel something beyond what the object is. > > If someone painted a piece made of random splats entirely out of blood, I would be thinking about the blood, and the violence needed to get the blood. > But paint randomly put on a canvas doesn't make me question anything like that. It's something a tiny child does, and has no greater meaning to anyone but the artist than something a toddler would make. So you think art is an THING that someway pay a lot for, that makes you think of something other than the object? It's not something that *needs* to be worth lots of money. I was asking why certain pieces, which are no different from everyday items (toddler's paintings, cups, urinals, etc) *are* worth lots of money and are considered art. They are worth lots of money because people will pay lots of money for those OBJECTS. But I consider "ART" something different than the objects. [STA-CITE]>By your definition, isn't everything a work of art? [END-CITE]Well, not until someone calls it art. >If someone paints a bunch of splats, then it's just a bunch of splats. Then they call it art, and suddenly that makes it important, and the fact that it makes you question whether or not it actually is art becomes the art. But doesn't that mean I can do it with anything? I drink out of the same coffee cup every day. It has a stain in the bottom. It's not art, and I probably couldn't sell it because it's ruined. However, if I call it art, does that suddenly make it so? Is it suddenly worth lots of money? Can I do that with all my possessions and sell them off, proclaiming them to be art? Sure, call it "I Fucking Hate Modern Art" and sell your stuff on eBay. People sometimes do weird shit and call it art, give it a shot. They don't always make money, of course. I don't know why you think art makes something suddenly worth a lot of money, ask an artist how that is working out for them sometime.