View Single Post
Old 12-08-2005, 02:26 AM   #53
Mishale
Gaming Art Historian
 
Mishale's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 144
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Phantom
The only reason why someone would make the distinction between something that's art and something that's not art, is because he's made a personal, subjective judgement on those two things and deems one 'better' than the other. It's purely subjective and essentially useless to make this distinction. The concept that the general public accepts as being art (architecture, paintings, ..., but NOT games, and only recently cinema) is only based on the opinion of important, influential historical persons, and actually has nothing at all to do with the quality or emotional value of those things.
This has got to be the most ignorant statement I've ever read. It's fine that you have your own personal opinion about acknowledging the concept of "art", but please don't mix up the facts. On what grounds exactly are you basing this statement on? That what is classified as "art" in modern day is ONLY based on the opinion of important, influential historical people, and nothing to do with the quality and emotional value? That is where you are wrong, my friend. Look at a Bernini sculpture and you'll understand the genius that went into his work. For example, Bernini always employed a technique called the "double-undercut" on the eyes of his sculptures so that it would cast the same shadows on the face whether it was lit from above or underneath. That sort of quality and attention to detail that goes into a slab of marble can be acknowledged by all, and it's not just because an important person says it's good.

But let's forget all that for a second and remember the different approaches to "art". As I mentioned in my previous post, there are many approaches to determining the value of something, and whether it can be "art" or non-art. It is far more than just someone making a personal, subjective judgment. How do you think it makes those of us in the art community feel when you say it's "useless to make this distinction"? Just an art historian's approach to art alone is far more complicated than just throwing out some personal subjective judgment about whether something is better than the next. Art historians aspire to analyze and to interpret the visual arts by identifying not just their materials and techniques, makers, time and place of creation. We also strive to determine the meaning or function - in short, their place in the scheme of history. Art historians concern themselves with unique historical phenomena, with aspects of human history, humanity, and social lifestyle. It is incumbent upon them to discover the historical niche that a work of art occupies and to assess that work in the light of its unique position. Art historians, therefore seek to identify its materials, technique, creator, school, period, and culture, as well as to relate it in a meaningful way to other works of art of the same school, period, and culture. At the same time they must remain sensitive to its essential aesthetic individuality.

So you see, not only do we look at the aesthetic value of a work of "art", we also have to look at how it influenced society, or how society influenced it. That is why we deem it so important in the context of the history of art, and not just because Pope Clement VII decided it was "art". The reason why we label these items as art is because of how it fits into the signs of the times, how it affected individuals as well as the society as a whole. It can evoke an emotional response, an insipid response, but what matters is that it stirred up something in someone at some point in time. Yet that is just one side of the coin itself, because there is a whole other side of the coin on which we can approach "art".

There's more to the world of art than just people's personal, subjective opinion. I'm perfectly fine with your attitude on the acknowledgment of the concept of "art" (because hey, art isn't for everybody), but it really offends me when people pull random things out of the air and seemingly state it as a fact. I know the internet is a place where you can be as tactless as you want, but for the sake of the wonderful community we have here... please watch what you say before you offend not just one person, but potentially an entire crowd. Thanks

BTW Sam, love those quotes! Especially "Art™ is an excuse for people to jerk off and wax their own egos in exchange for the misappropriated claim that they've been productive", LOL
Mishale is offline