 betty boop |
is it possible to distinguish `real art` from something that is only likable, but has no cathartic value?
or does it just depend on our subjective impression, existing only in the mind and not independently of it?
is there an artistic value?
and..what is beauty?
|
is it possible to distinguish `real art` from something that is only likable, but has no cathartic value?
or does it just depend on our subjective impression, existing only in the mind and not independently of it?
is there an artistic value?
and..what is beauty?
|
|
Posted: Jun 4, 2008 4:41 PM - Quote - Report! |
 |
albino strat! |
I'm not going to attempt to answer all your questions but the post made me think of a chapter in Eric G. Wilson's Against Happiness in which he argues that there is a simple distinction between what is pretty and what is beautiful.
"All pretty things are almost exactly alike, while all beautiful events are distinct. The pretty view has no dangerous edges; the pretty face features no unexpected distortions. Prettiness...is devoted to predictability and smoothness...Don't all post cards give off a similar idea?...Don't all supermodels look almost exactly alike?...pretty things suggest a kind of emptiness."
"Beauty, on the other hand, is organic. The beautiful object is unpredictably mottled, scabrous, and fractured. The beautiful vista is indeed teeming with ominous waves and cloud-rending peaks...The rough sea appears to manifest some magnificently afflicted organic principle..."
In Wilson's view, things are beautiful only because they reveal the death within them. It is in this way that "The transience of an object makes it beautiful." Sorry, I feel like Im drifting from your questions a bit, but I think its an interesting viewpoint on what defines beauty, why some works of art strike us in ways that others cannot.
Hopefully this helps...also sorry for the awkward quotations, I wish I had the patience to type up the passage in its entirety.
|
I'm not going to attempt to answer all your questions but the post made me think of a chapter in Eric G. Wilson's Against Happiness in which he argues that there is a simple distinction between what is pretty and what is beautiful.
"All pretty things are almost exactly alike, while all beautiful events are distinct. The pretty view has no dangerous edges; the pretty face features no unexpected distortions. Prettiness...is devoted to predictability and smoothness...Don't all post cards give off a similar idea?...Don't all supermodels look almost exactly alike?...pretty things suggest a kind of emptiness."
"Beauty, on the other hand, is organic. The beautiful object is unpredictably mottled, scabrous, and fractured. The beautiful vista is indeed teeming with ominous waves and cloud-rending peaks...The rough sea appears to manifest some magnificently afflicted organic principle..."
In Wilson's view, things are beautiful only because they reveal the death within them. It is in this way that "The transience of an object makes it beautiful." Sorry, I feel like Im drifting from your questions a bit, but I think its an interesting viewpoint on what defines beauty, why some works of art strike us in ways that others cannot.
Hopefully this helps...also sorry for the awkward quotations, I wish I had the patience to type up the passage in its entirety.
|
|
Posted: Jun 6, 2008 11:01 PM - Quote - Report! |
|
gonzaw |
Well, "beauty" is subjective...
But I guess art is somewhat different, and derives from consensus. And, since that consensus is also the one that determines youyr upbringing, it would also be the one that determines your subjective perception of it as art (making you think it is art)... |
Well, "beauty" is subjective...
But I guess art is somewhat different, and derives from consensus. And, since that consensus is also the one that determines youyr upbringing, it would also be the one that determines your subjective perception of it as art (making you think it is art)... |
|
Posted: Jun 17, 2008 12:40 AM - Quote - Report! |
|
dio_dude |
some will agree with me on this, real art is a painting which underneath the visual aspect lies a meaning. not a blatantly obvious one, one you have to search for. think of edgar allan poe's theory on literature and imagine that in art. |
some will agree with me on this, real art is a painting which underneath the visual aspect lies a meaning. not a blatantly obvious one, one you have to search for. think of edgar allan poe's theory on literature and imagine that in art. |
|
Posted: Jun 28, 2008 5:44 PM - Quote - Report! |
|
hugh20 |
i asked this in the pit and it only got a few replies. |
i asked this in the pit and it only got a few replies. |
|
Posted: Jan 21, 2009 4:35 PM - Quote - Report! |
|
Nacho_Novo |
Art represents reality. |
Art represents reality. |
|
Posted: Mar 1, 2009 6:54 PM - Quote - Report! |
|
Laughing_Eyes |
People are drawn to representations of their values; something you do not deem particularly beautiful is something that you do not particularly value.
Examining what people think is beautiful is the easiest way to determine their values; who they are as a person. Look at yourself- and the people and things you've defined as holding immense beauty. You'll find a pattern, and you'll be able to determine a definition of beauty for yourself.
For instance, New York City at dawn is one of most beautiful sights to me. The picture of it represents so much ability, advancement and hope to me. |
People are drawn to representations of their values; something you do not deem particularly beautiful is something that you do not particularly value.
Examining what people think is beautiful is the easiest way to determine their values; who they are as a person. Look at yourself- and the people and things you've defined as holding immense beauty. You'll find a pattern, and you'll be able to determine a definition of beauty for yourself.
For instance, New York City at dawn is one of most beautiful sights to me. The picture of it represents so much ability, advancement and hope to me. |
|
Posted: Mar 3, 2009 6:44 PM - Quote - Report! |
|
Nacho_Novo |
Off topic question: You aren't really almost 59 are you? |
Off topic question: You aren't really almost 59 are you? |
|
Posted: Mar 3, 2009 8:25 PM - Quote - Report! |
|
Laughing_Eyes |
No, I'm not. Are you implying I look of that age? |
No, I'm not. Are you implying I look of that age? |
|
Posted: Mar 4, 2009 1:28 PM - Quote - Report! |
|
Nacho_Novo |
No, I'm implying that you don't look of that age.
|
No, I'm implying that you don't look of that age.
|
|
Posted: Mar 4, 2009 7:55 PM - Quote - Report! |
|
Laughing_Eyes |
That's a huge relief, thank you. |
That's a huge relief, thank you. |
|
Posted: Mar 9, 2009 6:35 PM - Quote - Report! |
|
desadaphas |
Real Art needn't contain beauty. Real art is the expression of emotion through technique, so that anyone can pick up and feel this emotion too |
Real Art needn't contain beauty. Real art is the expression of emotion through technique, so that anyone can pick up and feel this emotion too |
|
Posted: Jun 24, 2009 10:21 PM - Quote - Report! |
| My Profile
Philosopher's Guild group
