Thread: But is it art?

I guess I'm the different one... I think it's art. A little morbid... but art none the less.

The real question is Does it match the couch? If yes, it's art.

Moot point, though. I don't think I could sit under any of that without being grossed-out, so no....not art.

This is Art:


Garfunkel.

Originally Posted by AetheLove

I can't decide if the art is supposed to be in the performance or in the finished painting.


Exhibit C:




Æ

Art can certainly be in the performance of creating a piece of art. The best example I can give is a Japanese calligrapher writing out a Haiku for display. The end result is a piece of art and the act of creating it is also certainly performance art. Similarly, we can look at a piano recital. What is the art in that case? Is it the sounds emanating from the piano, or is the performance by the pianist that produces those sounds? I say, "Why choose?" for I think both to be art.

Originally Posted by DJ Mr. White

I say, "Why choose?" for I think both to be art.

Agreed that either can be, or both. I was more wondering if the author/artist had an intent.

I'm all about the phenomenology, but I still like to know if the creator had a point.

[There are now further contributions, so the letter sequence is off.]

Next Exhibit:




(via: The Sculpture of Christopher Conte)


Æ

Originally Posted by dex71

Now that is awesome.

Originally Posted by Warprosper

I guess I'm the different one... I think it's art. A little morbid... but art none the less.

So is wiping your ass on a canvas if we're going to lower the standards far enough.