Sean asked on his blog:
When something is seen as completing the harmonious self; is it forever art? Is this piece of art supposed to be art to everyone and how does the viewer represent their qualifications to say what is harmonious?
There are things in this world that are supposedly seen by everyone as "art", but obviously not everyone agrees - even on these "universal" pieces. This is most apparent with the "classic" novels; not everyone enjoys or appreciates them, even though they are supposed to be amazing and everlasting.
I don't believe that something can be "forever art", however. The world's notion of art is forever changing, especially with the multitude of opinions of what would even be considered art.
Monday, February 28, 2011
Responding to Natalie
On her blog, Natalie posed the question:
If humans were without a soul, would art exist? Do you agree or disagree with me?
First, I don't believe that animals do not have souls, which is an argument she makes. True, they do not act like humans, but that does not mean they don't have a soul. What even constitutes having a soul? Animals create beautiful things, whether on purpose or just for the pragmatics. Not everything done by an animal is instinct, however. Also, it must be determined if animals are different from nature, because if they aren't, than neither are humans.
Now, to answer Natalie's question. Instead of with a yes or no, I will say that I do not believe having a "soul" is totally necessary to creating art, as long as one has the instinct to create.
It was stated in class today that animals do not understand the concept of art, even though they make it. What do you think of this statement?
If humans were without a soul, would art exist? Do you agree or disagree with me?
First, I don't believe that animals do not have souls, which is an argument she makes. True, they do not act like humans, but that does not mean they don't have a soul. What even constitutes having a soul? Animals create beautiful things, whether on purpose or just for the pragmatics. Not everything done by an animal is instinct, however. Also, it must be determined if animals are different from nature, because if they aren't, than neither are humans.
Now, to answer Natalie's question. Instead of with a yes or no, I will say that I do not believe having a "soul" is totally necessary to creating art, as long as one has the instinct to create.
It was stated in class today that animals do not understand the concept of art, even though they make it. What do you think of this statement?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)