Iron clad definition of 'Art'

[grommet]

Glen, your logic escapes me.
It must be art.

[evaldart]

Right Glenn...you got it by the end. A "random sample of people" are the LEAST likely to have a clue.
And only after a vastness of intellectual terrain has been laboriously plowed-through will the solitary and self-determined possessor of an elevated compositional sensibility even be allowed to sow the seeds that MIGHT eventually grow, vine-like, into the entangling and uplifting awarenesses that will permit that individual identification of real Art. Find a random sample of THOSE folks...and they'll tell you whats what.

[CritterSteve]

Originally Posted by evaldart

Art cannot possess function.

They reckon cave art wasn't about depicting what the cave men wanted to catch and eat, but its function was fixing the content of trances, featuring attributes in nature they wanted to posses.
The result was people learned a visual language.
Making small goddess statues was meant to curry favor, secure harvests, try and control the future.
Stories coupled with music and imagery were used to pass down important cultural behaviors and beliefs.
Greek statues of gods were made to actually BE those gods.
Narrative paintings educated (if you agreed with them) or provided propaganda (if you didn't) political or religious ideologies.
Art featuring death was used to calm our fears of mortality, or feel all powerful over an enemy. Focusing on the enemy distracts from injustice among the populace. (can y'all tell I've been at the documentaries again)

Just curious. When did art start not having a function?

[evaldart]

Originally Posted by CritterSteve

They reckon cave art wasn't about depicting what the cave men wanted to catch and eat, but its function was fixing the content of trances, featuring attributes in nature they wanted to posses.
The result was people learned a visual language.
Making small goddess statues was meant to curry favor, secure harvests, try and control the future.
Stories coupled with music and imagery were used to pass down important cultural behaviors and beliefs.
Greek statues of gods were made to actually BE those gods.
Narrative paintings educated (if you agreed with them) or provided propaganda (if you didn't) political or religious ideologies.
Art featuring death was used to calm our fears of mortality, or feel all powerful over an enemy. Focusing on the enemy distracts from injustice among the populace. (can y'all tell I've been at the documentaries again)

Just curious. When did art start not having a function?

Critter...exactly. Art (or later as it was expanded into "aesthetics" by the mere thinkers who couldnt "do" things) has always been the catylist for human progress. It taught us how to use our hands...and conceive design...and pay homage to imagined intimidators, etc. But in this short time the human intellect has progressed tremendously. Consciousness, awareness and perception have begun to look inward by the individual...away from the mere utilitarian applications that was demanded by the group (which, of course must be maintained as a necessary aside).
So, as the creative impulse began to explore alternative territories, it realized that it didnt actually need the validation of serving any purpose...it could exist even better all on its own. So braver and braver artists detached themselves and pursued stylistic and uncharted variations (and the wiley ones were even able to pass off their anti-functional deviances within the usual mundane contexts of existing genres - and get payed, too).

So as contemporary inellects, WE, the creators of today, know that there is a big difference between craft and Art, and that there is a big difference between skill and ability, between knowledge and ideas, between design and innovation.

quite simply, Carravaggio was not a realist, Mike's Pieta was not about a bible story, Van Gogh didnt really care about sunflowers, and Serra does not really care about steel. Those artists might have been connected to some functions by the surface interpretation of their work (like many others) but there are formal impactfulnesses happening by them that leave any surmised "function" back down on the earth with the coffee cups and the bridges.

I know its easy to look around and still see the cave men...but we are way more...some anyways.

[sculptor]

Originally Posted by evaldart

... in this short time the human intellect has progressed tremendously. Consciousness, awareness and perception have begun to look ...away from the mere utilitarian applications ...still see the cave men...but we are way more...some anyways.

Most of what Evald says has a lot of pithy truisms

the above, removed from context, however, is arrogant bull shit(no offense intended)
as evidenced by the bruger head and others, art has been around since the genetic reunification of sapiens archaic and neanderthalensis

the hard wiring hasn't changed for at least 30,000 years(more likely 40)
we've the same abilities of reasoning, imagination, innovation, artistic intent, etc...etc...
what has changed is that as our cultural heritage has survived major disruptions
we see farther because we stand on the shoulders of giants
.....
caveat for critter
assuming intended function for prehistoric art is a dicey move on a good day

[CritterSteve]

Originally Posted by sculptor

caveat for critter
assuming intended function for prehistoric art is a dicey move on a good day

Understood.
The documentary in question made a pretty good case, worth a look if you pick it up on Netflix, it's called 'How art made the world'. Kind of a detective story, but quite convincing (maybe because my old caveman brain likes the narrative flow of the uncovering of the answers, regardless of their truth, although my rational modern brain likes to think the evidence was persuasive).
I have to confess I live in a world of coffee cups.

[evaldart]

Of course... humanity is still mostly only concerned with "stepping on toes" instead of "standing on shoulders". But I see that changing. The "hard-wiring" doesnt matter. The relevent improvements are not connected to physiology. there are "cause-less" motivations that tingle a perceivers perimeters. Only very willing curiosities will respond to them. Those tantalizers represent ALL the possible progress...and they build the shoulders for others; necessarily without concern over whether anyone might ever stand on them.

[sculptor]

Originally Posted by evaldart

there are "cause-less" motivations ... Only very willing curiosities will respond to them. Those tantalizers ... build the shoulders for others; necessarily without concern over whether anyone might ever stand on them.

cause-less
well...just because you cannot perceive nor identify a "cause" doesn't mean there wasn't one...we are all products of our culture(current and past)

and
I have seen farther by standing on your shoulders
what you do with steel delights my eyes(of course, my prejudice leads me to prefer your more figurative efforts--for me, they have clearer narrative)

[evaldart]

Sculptor, I dont mean that an individual's creative impulse should abandon or possess disdain for those folks that make-up the culture that truly does permit him/her. Perhaps it is the definition of "function" that needs exploring...or we need a new word. Language is ever well behind thinking. And we developed language to communicate with each other (not for any other reason) but we have NEVER needed language to communicate with ourself. Problem is...people began to think in language instead of in (visual) perception. So the easy route was taken by most and the creative impulse was buried in the name of community...in the name of group/community/society/country/race/species. But the artists have always ONLY been the ones who have defied and quite ignored the plight of human beings in favor of the plight of just "being"...and have also always been the only ones who left anything behind that let any other humans, who managed to get affected by those unique efforts, partake and stand on some shoulders.
In all, if you develop some good shoulders...some will will be able to stand on them. Thats all.

Sorry all, guess I'm in the mood tonite.

[StevenW]

Function, purpose, meaning,.. language is indeed limited and cannot fully express our thoughts and perhaps that is a better role for art and sculpture, to convey them in a more compact and real fashion..

[GlennT]

evaldart, much of the art that you consider superior because it transcends function does in fact perform a function; it informs us of the vain vapidity of the human ego when engaged in narcissistic navel-gazing. Or serves as a baramoter of psychosis.

Even the good stuff that is "free of function" performs a function, it inspires, instructs, uplifts, and otherwise goads humanity to remember elements of greatness within and without.

[evaldart]

Originally Posted by GlennT

evaldart, much of the art that you consider superior because it transcends function does in fact perform a function; it informs us of the vain vapidity of the human ego when engaged in narcissistic navel-gazing. Or serves as a baramoter of psychosis.

Even the good stuff that is "free of function" performs a function, it inspires, instructs, uplifts, and otherwise goads humanity to remember elements of greatness within and without.

The words "ego", "narcissistic" and "psychosis" ,among many others, were invented to use against the unusual and exceptional efforts of individuals who might be detaching. Humanity survived originally because of the group - and Nature would have us stay that way forever. If you must assign function to everything (because it makes you feel better) the function in the finest artistic efforts it is to example to all (not just the maker ) that the most relevent experiences wont necessarily include other people at all.

But we can always visit for some fuel and pleasantries..

[sculptor]

Originally Posted by evaldart

Problem is...people began to think in language instead of in (visual) perception. S...

and language, derived to describe other things, is a limiting factor, a hollow echo, from which we, the visually oriented, have an intrinsic freedom.

While sketching concepts, engaged in a redesign of a redesign, the wife of my client explained to her verbose husband, who seemed impatient with the intermediate step of design on paper "Rodney is visually oriented"

Build what you want to see
cook what you want t taste
do what delights you
and the function will be sharing

[GlennT]

Originally Posted by evaldart

The words "ego", "narcissistic" and "psychosis" ,among many others, were invented to use against the unusual and exceptional efforts of individuals who might be detaching.

Actually, words like "genius", "creative", and "artist" were often used to describe such individuals.

"Ego" does not describe anything exceptional, transcending the ego is what makes one exceptional. "Narcissistic" in today's world is also not unusual ot exceptional, it is the norm all too often. "Psychosis" is unusual, and is a method of detaching, but not in a manner that leads to exceptional behavior.

[evaldart]

Most sculptures can function as coat racks...but NO coat racks can be sculptures. (this is not to say that a coat rack cannot be a visual treat...but visual treats are not Art)

there...can-o-worms.

[Duck]

Originally Posted by evaldart

Most sculptures can function as coat racks...but NO coat racks can be sculptures. (this is not to say that a coat rack cannot be a visual treat...but visual treats are not Art)

there...can-o-worms.

So is this just a common way to store long pieces of string or what?

[sparrow]

Hey Duck, That would make a great cat scratching post and toy
Nice bit of artwork too I might add.

[rika]

Originally Posted by Duck

So is this just a common way to store long pieces of string or what?

Nah, a torture device.

[CritterSteve]

Originally Posted by evaldart

Most sculptures can function as coat racks...but NO coat racks can be sculptures.

How about hat stands?

Rodin got a bit upset when someone hung their hat on a protruding figure from his work in progress, 'the gates of hell'.

I don't think Michelangelo, if he was watching from beyond the grave and seeing twisty metal sculptures from the sidelines, would slap his head and say 'Duh, what was I thinking?'.

I just think different kinds of art appeal to different kinds of people.

I don't think it's linear, but branching, like life.

It's like comparing molluscs, fungi, mice, venus fly traps, etc.
Of course I think Michelangelo's tree is best!

Except for maybe the film tree.
Films can get you on every level.

[sculptor]

it seems that the longer we gnaw away at this bone, the less meat we find on it

so far we seem to be focusing on what is not art and by assumptions of a positive in the negative, struggling to formulate an answer to the original quest

a dog is not a vegetable, not a star, not a sea, not an ocean, not a cow, not a mouse, and
we still don't know what a dog is
just some of what it is not

the art of mathematics
the art of physics
the art of medicine
the art of metal working
the art of ...
...
is "the art of" within our definition of an "iron clad definition..."
...
is the higgs boson the art of matter?
or is it an impossible quest
seeking a structure in a theoretical concept
based on a flawed mathematical theory?

are we on a similar quest
is there an objective unity
are we relegated to an infinity of subjective determinants based on negative analogies ?

....
15 pages(so far)----we've hundreds more to go to arrive at Suzuki's efforts

[evaldart]

Being is bigger than existing. Existing is bigger than living. Living is bigger than Art, and other stuff that one does. Art and other stuff are several different lives happening at once. Those several things are bigger than nothingness.

SO...somewhere between being and nothingness a body does many things and maybe some of them are Art. If it is the Art that is ever on your mind you will attempt to identify it by any means. You will get comfortable chameleon-ing through a set of lives. Some of those lives will REQUIRE but only ONE of them will not require. Only ONE of those lives will not NEED. Only one of those lives will get approached with you being absolutely ready. THAT would be the Art life. So look at the things that happen there...likely there will be evidence that some Art occured.

[sculptor]

Evald
I'm getting the impression that, for you,
ART is not purely product.

though leaning heavily toward,
but
not wholly process

though the creation of which occurs within a state of being