Total Posts:9|Showing Posts:1-9
Jump to topic:

Modern Art

SmallTacos
Posts: 160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/23/2015 6:32:32 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
Hey guys, I just wanted to start a topic on art and how I think it should return to classic values that appealed to beauty, because while anything can be art, only beautiful things can be good art.
I am groot.
cludwig
Posts: 16
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2015 2:04:46 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
Hello SmallTacos. You refer to what is called Aesthetics in art. In fact, as a graduate student in Music Composition, I took a music philosophy course that was simply called "Music Aesthetics" out of personal interest. It is actually a very large area of study with a great deal of scholarly writings. It is also not an area of common study; at least in my field. The philosopher John Dewey had a great deal of useful and inspiring insight on the subject. Determining whether a piece of art is beautiful or not is a complicated matter; it can be based on broader cultural values. Another approach is to understand the concept of "Canon", and how and who determines what will comprise the Canon. In simple terms, to understand canon is to understand why one artist is included and valued in history more than another. In fact the way a piece of art or music enters the canon is a fairly flawed and random process.
Dewey's approach however in determining the beauty or value of a piece of art is centered on the experiential. I tend to favor and value Dewey's approach. I could explain more about the "experiential" approach to art and music if you are interested.
cludwig
Posts: 16
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2015 2:19:18 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
To add to what I last said, the following is a link to a Stanford article on John Dewey's work "Art as Experience"
http://plato.stanford.edu...
I do recommend Dewey's book over the Stanford synopsis however. It is a more enjoyable read.
Garbanza
Posts: 1,997
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2015 4:41:26 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/24/2015 2:19:18 AM, cludwig wrote:
To add to what I last said, the following is a link to a Stanford article on John Dewey's work "Art as Experience"
http://plato.stanford.edu...
I do recommend Dewey's book over the Stanford synopsis however. It is a more enjoyable read.

Thanks that's really interesting. I'm going to try reading it, although even just from the Stanford summary it's already annoying me, because I'm imagining a group of privileged men sitting around thinking about how sublime their experiences are, while other people are doing the laundry, cleaning the toilets, and sorting through paperwork. But maybe that's just me. I really do know a philosopher who believes it's wrong for him to bother himself with the humdrum details of existence because he's a specialist in finer things, and so getting someone to clean up after him is his duty to humanity, or something. It's just like fingernails down a blackboard to me, that kind of thinking. Still. I suppose you have to accept that we do value some experiences over others. Otherwise, how could there be art at all.
Garbanza
Posts: 1,997
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2015 4:49:16 AM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/23/2015 6:32:32 PM, SmallTacos wrote:
Hey guys, I just wanted to start a topic on art and how I think it should return to classic values that appealed to beauty, because while anything can be art, only beautiful things can be good art.

I honestly don't even know what beauty is. How do you decide what's beautiful and what isn't? Is it just a feeling you have when you see something?
SmallTacos
Posts: 160
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
3/24/2015 3:42:04 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/24/2015 4:49:16 AM, Garbanza wrote:
At 3/23/2015 6:32:32 PM, SmallTacos wrote:
Hey guys, I just wanted to start a topic on art and how I think it should return to classic values that appealed to beauty, because while anything can be art, only beautiful things can be good art.

I honestly don't even know what beauty is. How do you decide what's beautiful and what isn't? Is it just a feeling you have when you see something?

Yes, but that feeling is related to brain chemistry.
I am groot.
vd7752
Posts: 5
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/3/2015 1:08:16 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/23/2015 6:32:32 PM, SmallTacos wrote:
Hey guys, I just wanted to start a topic on art and how I think it should return to classic values that appealed to beauty, because while anything can be art, only beautiful things can be good art.
_____________________________________________________________________________
You're right! We should remind about classical art every day. Because we are sinking in the abstraction, like this - http://lafozi.com...
Saint_of_Me
Posts: 2,402
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/7/2015 2:09:29 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/23/2015 6:32:32 PM, SmallTacos wrote:
Hey guys, I just wanted to start a topic on art and how I think it should return to classic values that appealed to beauty, because while anything can be art, only beautiful things can be good art.

I see where you are going with this, and used to agree. That is, with your opinion than "only beautiful things can be good art."

Like some of that 60s Andy Warhol stuff. The soup cans. The toilet. Some of the Dada stuff--which actually grew out of rebellion to the classical art you speak of.

And some of the abstract art is indeed hard to fathom. For example, I never understood the appeal of Jackson Pollock's "drip art." LOL.

But I DO like some abstract stuff. ANd especially abstract/expressionism.

Wasily Kandinsky, for example, is one of my favorites in that genre. So is Paul Klee.

But..back to the beauty thing. My ex was an MFA and I learned some stuff about art from her. And one of the things I learned was that art is a language. An attempt by the artist to express feelings or thoughts to somebody. Just like conversation. Or music.

So..since it IS a language, sometime it can be used effectively to convey the ugly aspects of life. And if it is done well, then it has done its job. Like all "good" art does: it touches the viewer.

Thus..we can have "good" art that is aesthetically ugly. Or...Ugly Art. (though I do not believe that is the correct name for the genre). LOL.
Science Flies Us to the Moon. Religion Flies us Into Skyscrapers.
lannan13
Posts: 23,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/15/2015 1:54:18 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 3/23/2015 6:32:32 PM, SmallTacos wrote:
Hey guys, I just wanted to start a topic on art and how I think it should return to classic values that appealed to beauty, because while anything can be art, only beautiful things can be good art.

I like Dadaism. It's great to observe.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-Lannan13'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

If the sky's the limit then why do we have footprints on the Moon? I'm shooting my aspirations for the stars.

"If you are going through hell, keep going." "Sir Winston Churchill

"No one can make you feel inferior without your consent." "Eleanor Roosevelt

Topics I want to debate. (http://tinyurl.com...)
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~