|
|
deepspace9mm
from filth on 2003-11-09 13:07 [#00942447]
Points: 6846 Status: Addict
|
|
I'm talking in moral terms... is there a shock limit?
Could paedophilia, suicide, rape, murder etc be considered art IF they were treated as aesthetic or conceptual elements (or even if they weren't?)
Were the 9/11 attacks art on some level? (after all, surely they were designed with spectacular visual impact in mind...)
And just who the fuck determines how far the artist should go? Himself? Society? The legal system?
*ponders*
|
|
nacmat
on 2003-11-09 13:08 [#00942451]
Points: 31271 Status: Lurker
|
|
art has no limits... if it crosses the limit then its probably not art
|
|
ambsace
from canaDUH. on 2003-11-09 13:09 [#00942452]
Points: 6326 Status: Lurker
|
|
hahha. brilliant.
|
|
hedphukkerr
from mathbotton (United States) on 2003-11-09 13:09 [#00942453]
Points: 8833 Status: Regular
|
|
i really dont think art goes too far, unless it ends up harming someone physically or mentally without their wanting it to. other than that, just about anything can be considered art, as long as there are intentions for it. for instance, the 9/11 attacks really cant be considered art because they werent meant to; they were meant to start an unneeded war (and did) and kill thousands of innocent people, not to be considered as art
|
|
pachi
from yo momma (United States) on 2003-11-09 13:24 [#00942463]
Points: 8984 Status: Lurker
|
|
the only limit is your mind.
|
|
Oddioblender
from Fort Worth, TX (United States) on 2003-11-09 13:32 [#00942471]
Points: 9601 Status: Lurker
|
|
if a woman shaking 600,000 peoples' hands over the course of a few months, or that same woman cleaning a patch of sidewalk for 24 hours is considered art, i guess anything could be....
|
|
nobsmuggler
from silly mid-off on 2003-11-09 13:34 [#00942472]
Points: 6265 Status: Addict | Followup to Oddioblender: #00942471
|
|
does that make the houston 620 art ;)
|
|
fleetmouse
from Horny for Truth on 2003-11-09 13:35 [#00942474]
Points: 18042 Status: Lurker
|
|
9/11 clashes with my couch so it can't be art. Good art matches your furniture.
|
|
nobsmuggler
from silly mid-off on 2003-11-09 13:35 [#00942475]
Points: 6265 Status: Addict | Followup to fleetmouse: #00942474
|
|
isnt that fen shui (spelling)
|
|
Anus_Presley
on 2003-11-09 13:42 [#00942480]
Points: 23472 Status: Lurker | Followup to fleetmouse: #00942474
|
|
that's not as silly as it sounds. arrt is something differrent to everryone. if a bit of arrts purrpose is to match someones sofa and it does... then it's good in that it fullfils its purrpose.
if the arrt is intended to shock and it does then it's good because the arrtist crreated frrom nothing, something that does what he intended it to do.
therre is differrent arrt forr everryone, not just snobs who 'know what they arre talking about'
|
|
deepspace9mm
from filth on 2003-11-09 13:45 [#00942484]
Points: 6846 Status: Addict
|
|
Who defines what is art? Is it the viewer or the creator?
|
|
Oddioblender
from Fort Worth, TX (United States) on 2003-11-09 13:47 [#00942490]
Points: 9601 Status: Lurker | Followup to deepspace9mm: #00942484
|
|
i believe it's the creator.
|
|
Oddioblender
from Fort Worth, TX (United States) on 2003-11-09 13:47 [#00942492]
Points: 9601 Status: Lurker
|
|
if you don't believe me, look at the "dada" style. :D
|
|
deepspace9mm
from filth on 2003-11-09 13:49 [#00942496]
Points: 6846 Status: Addict | Followup to Oddioblender: #00942490
|
|
That's how i think too... good old marcel duchamp :D
another question: can something be art even if it wasn't intended to be?
|
|
nlogax
from oh, you must be the brains (Norway) on 2003-11-09 13:49 [#00942497]
Points: 4653 Status: Regular
|
|
there are no boundaries. art/music is limitless.
paedophilia, suicide, rape, murder etc have all been used in/to make art. Though, something tells me I should be careful with the p-word on this board, due to previous experiences.
|
|
fleetmouse
from Horny for Truth on 2003-11-09 13:50 [#00942498]
Points: 18042 Status: Lurker | Followup to Anus_Presley: #00942480
|
|
What about "found" art? It can mean one thing to the creator, another to the artist who frames and presents it, and still another to the spectator.
I dunno, maybe Osama Bin Laden thinks I have an ugly couch.
|
|
KADO
from The Belafonte (United Kingdom) on 2003-11-09 13:51 [#00942504]
Points: 1484 Status: Regular
|
|
The Viewer and the Creator are equally important as eachother. If u showed 100 people a peice of art, you would get 100 slightly different but unique interpretations on what it means to each of them. Thats why there are so many different opinions on what is good art and what isnt.
|
|
KADO
from The Belafonte (United Kingdom) on 2003-11-09 13:52 [#00942507]
Points: 1484 Status: Regular
|
|
Didnt aphex play recorded Rape sounds at his barbican gig? Or was that just fucked up hype?
|
|
Oddioblender
from Fort Worth, TX (United States) on 2003-11-09 13:53 [#00942508]
Points: 9601 Status: Lurker | Followup to deepspace9mm: #00942496
|
|
i think it could - the eye of beholder is the variable in all art, the one thing that is never the same, because, as KADO says, everyone perceives art in a unique fashion.
|
|
fleetmouse
from Horny for Truth on 2003-11-09 13:53 [#00942509]
Points: 18042 Status: Lurker
|
|
Let's see, so far we've mentioned pedophilia and terrorism in this thread - let's also talk about guns and drugs to keep the CIA entertained!
Blah blah blah, guns drugs hamburgers amputation murder nazi hitler militia hello kitty
|
|
Anus_Presley
on 2003-11-09 13:56 [#00942519]
Points: 23472 Status: Lurker | Followup to fleetmouse: #00942498
|
|
i don't think we can define arrt. we can trry but we will neverr do it.
it's like human behaviourr. psychologists come up with theorry upon theorry to explain and define it and each one as good as it sounds is utterrly flawed. arrt is the same, it's farr to complicated to define.
|
|
fleetmouse
from Horny for Truth on 2003-11-09 13:58 [#00942524]
Points: 18042 Status: Lurker | Followup to Anus_Presley: #00942519
|
|
That's exactly what the book Godel Escher Bach is about, but you just said it in a lot fewer words. :-)
|
|
Oddioblender
from Fort Worth, TX (United States) on 2003-11-09 13:58 [#00942526]
Points: 9601 Status: Lurker | Followup to fleetmouse: #00942509
|
|
don't forget martha stewart and the mayor of philadelphia....
|
|
rockenjohnny
from champagne socialism (Australia) on 2003-11-09 14:00 [#00942529]
Points: 7983 Status: Lurker | Followup to deepspace9mm: #00942447
|
|
i dont believe its an artform to inflict suffering on another.. unless were talking about that kinky stuff
|
|
happy cycling
from berlin on 2003-11-09 14:00 [#00942530]
Points: 2786 Status: Regular
|
|
everything pretty is permitted
|
|
earthleakage
from tell the world you're winning on 2003-11-09 14:00 [#00942531]
Points: 27795 Status: Regular
|
|
art is art if you say its art and you are an artist
|
|
fleetmouse
from Horny for Truth on 2003-11-09 14:00 [#00942532]
Points: 18042 Status: Lurker | Followup to Oddioblender: #00942526
|
|
oooohhh yeah, and Halliburton and Enron and the Freemasons and the Illuminati and David Icke and....
|
|
Oddioblender
from Fort Worth, TX (United States) on 2003-11-09 14:02 [#00942534]
Points: 9601 Status: Lurker | Followup to fleetmouse: #00942532
|
|
btw, is that andy warhol in your avatar?
|
|
deepspace9mm
from filth on 2003-11-09 14:03 [#00942536]
Points: 6846 Status: Addict | Followup to Anus_Presley: #00942519
|
|
I think that's true... probably because we're all bringing our unique perspectives to it, art and music both mean subtly different things to different people. It's the same with the noise vs music argument.
|
|
deepspace9mm
from filth on 2003-11-09 14:04 [#00942540]
Points: 6846 Status: Addict | Followup to earthleakage: #00942531
|
|
Only if you're an artist?
|
|
earthleakage
from tell the world you're winning on 2003-11-09 14:06 [#00942544]
Points: 27795 Status: Regular | Followup to deepspace9mm: #00942540
|
|
yes
|
|
earthleakage
from tell the world you're winning on 2003-11-09 14:07 [#00942545]
Points: 27795 Status: Regular
|
|
you can create art without being an artist, and you can't say what is art and what isn't art if you aren't an artist
|
|
earthleakage
from tell the world you're winning on 2003-11-09 14:07 [#00942546]
Points: 27795 Status: Regular | Followup to earthleakage: #00942545
|
|
*can't
|
|
deepspace9mm
from filth on 2003-11-09 14:10 [#00942548]
Points: 6846 Status: Addict | Followup to earthleakage: #00942545
|
|
Fair enough. That's me told then. :-)
|
|
KADO
from The Belafonte (United Kingdom) on 2003-11-09 14:11 [#00942549]
Points: 1484 Status: Regular
|
|
Yo Anus. Is Arrt what pirates make?
|
|
fleetmouse
from Horny for Truth on 2003-11-09 14:25 [#00942566]
Points: 18042 Status: Lurker | Followup to Oddioblender: #00942534
|
|
Yeah, I'm gonna go paint some soup cans now.
|
|
Crocomire
from plante (United States) on 2003-11-09 14:47 [#00942596]
Points: 2116 Status: Lurker
|
|
art should go as far as the artist sees fit. holding back only hurts our cultural evolution.
|
|
marlowe
from Antarctica on 2003-11-09 15:07 [#00942628]
Points: 24588 Status: Lurker
|
|
another wank thread
|
|
Jedi Chris
on 2003-11-09 15:09 [#00942633]
Points: 11496 Status: Lurker | Followup to deepspace9mm: #00942447
|
|
Crime isn't art....no matter how you dress it
|
|
DeadEight
from vancouver (Canada) on 2003-11-09 15:11 [#00942637]
Points: 5437 Status: Regular
|
|
i wouldn't say that Duchamp believed that the artist determined the art... he comes at it from a pragmatic viewpoint: that is to say a something is aethetic if i treat it as such? so whoever views it as art determines whether or not it is (to them)... i wonder to what extent we can even distinguish the creator from the viewer in art, because both play similar roles in the process... another place where one might draw a distinction is between aesthetic and those that interact with it...
|
|
DeadEight
from vancouver (Canada) on 2003-11-09 15:13 [#00942641]
Points: 5437 Status: Regular
|
|
i disagree, Jedi Chris... art isn't defined by some sort of morality... it is an unadulterated expression of the human condition in all the colours that that condition manifests itself...
|
|
Crocomire
from plante (United States) on 2003-11-09 15:14 [#00942642]
Points: 2116 Status: Lurker
|
|
Jedi Chris always thinks his way of seeing things is the "right" way.
|
|
plaidzebra
from so long, xlt on 2003-11-09 15:19 [#00942646]
Points: 5678 Status: Lurker
|
|
ever heard of peter sotos? visual art celebrating child rape and murder. or whitehouse? music that is motivated by sadistic intent.
if art relies on communication to have meaning, art that defies the values of most people (eg celebrates paedophilia, murder etc) will be infamous at best, litigated into obscurity, or remain unknown, buried and forgotten.
the vast majority of art objects intended for public consumption (in the west) are created as objects of commerce. so the largest influence on western art at the moment is the demands of the market.
was 9/11 a work of art on some level? is my shirt a pair of pants on some level?
and yet, consider films like the recent "texas chainsaw massacre." not everyone will agree with me, of course, but to me a film like this is an artful entertainment selling the thrill of watching the fictional but utterly realistic hunting down and murder of human beings. to most people, it seems, this is unquestioningly acceptable and harmless. a tree bearing rotten fruit is what i see.
in the long run, art is utterly ephemeral.
|
|
Anus_Presley
on 2003-11-09 15:25 [#00942653]
Points: 23472 Status: Lurker | Followup to Jedi Chris: #00942633
|
|
grraffiti on public walls forr example. that's a crrime but it's still arrt...
|
|
Crocomire
from plante (United States) on 2003-11-09 15:26 [#00942654]
Points: 2116 Status: Lurker
|
|
to me, texas chainsaw massacre does a public service as well: being based on a true event, it sheds light on an extreme state of the human condition.
|
|
-V-
from Ensenada Drive on 2003-11-09 15:29 [#00942660]
Points: 1452 Status: Lurker
|
|
If the purpose of what you make is to be shocking, then what you're trying to accomplish has already been done to death. Even if you could get someone else to consider it 'art', it'll still be shallow and contrived. If you have to stoop to the level of being shocking just to get a reaction out of people, then, in my opinion, you should most likely find something better to do with your time.
|
|
Anus_Presley
on 2003-11-09 15:30 [#00942661]
Points: 23472 Status: Lurker | Followup to Crocomire: #00942654
|
|
arrt rreplicating life rreplicating arrt?
|
|
rockenjohnny
from champagne socialism (Australia) on 2003-11-09 15:31 [#00942662]
Points: 7983 Status: Lurker
|
|
not much is shocking nowadays. except perhaps the really creepy people that are mentioned here. but thats not something that you want to see (doesnt that constitute art?)
|
|
Jedi Chris
on 2003-11-09 15:34 [#00942669]
Points: 11496 Status: Lurker | Followup to Crocomire: #00942642
|
|
What kind of irrational person would I be I thought any other way :P
|
|
tolstoyed
from the ocean on 2003-11-09 15:35 [#00942671]
Points: 50073 Status: Moderator
|
|
And just who the fuck determines how far the artist should go? Himself? Society? The legal system?
i dont think it has anything to do with the legal system - you may get arested but it still is art
i think its up to every individual and his perception - i think body art - i saw an "artist" cutting his body and bleding like a pig, actually he was even hanging as a pig (after they get slaughtered - to let the blood out) - i dont concider this art, but many people do
so i pretty much think there are no limits to it...
it only depends whats legal and whats not on people (and their individual opinion on this) that are in position to determin whats art and what isnt...in some countries some things are allowed that would put an artist in jail in another country for sure
|
|
Messageboard index
|