Will a clear cut line ever be drawn on what is art and what is not; without regard to aesthetics, or will works of art just become more and more ridiculous and simplistic as time goes on?
I don't think a clear line can every be drawn; what can be hopefully defined is what categories to include. The biggest one is it has to be man-made, and usually with the intention of art.
Brycen used an example of a man gathering a bunch of sticks from a tree, dropping them on the floor and calling that art, as a way to exemplify how ridiculous art can be sometimes.
If we take the general definition of art, however, than this intention will in fact be art. This brings us back to the question of whether or not opinion of observers makes something art or not. I don't think that this can ever be the case simply because there are too many opinions in the world to make a concrete decision such as this.
And so Brycen, I don't think art will ever be truly defined, unfortunately, as long as there are the millions of different opinions in the world.
My question to you though is: is this really such a bad thing?
No comments:
Post a Comment