[Fe] Art that invokes emotion or art that invokes thought?

[Nillerz]

Which do you prefer?

 

[Lady_X]

they're so intertwined i'm not sure i can tell the difference.

 

[SillySapienne]

Thought.

 

[Spartacuss]

they're so intertwined i'm not sure i can tell the difference.

^ True - of the best art, that is.
Edit to add: As a sentient being, I prefer art that engages my mind as well as emotions, as sentience doesn't begin/end with either. It is great when you can get to the one aspect indirectly by appealing directly to the other, but I confess I cannot choose a preference of starting points at this time.

 

[Nillerz]

I tend to lean to thought, since art that invokes emotion seems to me to be the most simple use of technical art skils, wheras thought invoking requires thought.

 

[lane777]

Emotion. With me, it's so subtle that I often miss it's presence or fail to identify the particular emotion I'm experiencing. So it's pure bliss when something (art, music, dance) invokes strong feeling... Possibly many non Fi's take this clarity for granted.

 

[blanclait]

thought, b/c i can't really feel any intense emotion from art.

 

[Spartacuss]

thought, b/c i can't really feel any intense emotion from art.

Funny, as an opposite reaction is precisely the pull. If it weren't for art, I'd be a robot. Especially music. That's a bit of an exaggeration, but the most intense emotions often have an aesthetic origin for me.

 

[Unique]

thought

 

[Jack Flak]

Emotion. I got all my thinkin' done years ago. (So to speak.)

 

[sarah]

Thought, but in the form of contemplation, not logical reasoning. Art that ONLY invokes an emotional response freaks me out because I hate being emotionally manipulated. But I can choose to contemplate a piece of art for as long as I want to.

Sarah

 

[Chukamok]

I guess it depends on how it's presented. Most art pieces I've seen that go for pure emotion are of the knee-jerk variety. A piece that comes to mind is "Piss Christ" where a crucifix was submerged in a jar of urine. I find this kind of emotional art a load of crap.

To me the best emotional pieces are the ones you have to think about first. Only after you soak it all in does the emotion settle on you. Picasso's "Guernica" is a prime example of this.

That said, I would say "invoke thought" or "invoke thought that creates emotion".

 

[anainani]

When it comes to music, then I go for emotion. Songs that create thought usually have some profound lyrics, no? I usually don't care about lyrics that much, unless they're really good.
When it comes to other types of art, the best ones are the ones that invoke both, but if I had to choose, I'd say thought. Usually, at least for me, if there's thought, some emotion comes with it too.

 

[Martoon]

I think the invocation of emotion or thought has more to do with the process the artist uses to create the art than it has to do with its effect on me. As to art that evokes emotion or thought, if I could only have one, it would probably be that of emotion. As illustrated by the annoying, anal hairsplitting I just did there, I've got that "thought" thing going on all the time, whether I want to or not. But anything that can pull raw, genuine emotion from me without it being strangled by relentless rational analysis is a good thing.

 

[anainani]

Martoon, that's the most frightening avatar I've seen in my life.

 

[INTJMom]

Which do you prefer?

I don't look at Art so I can think,
so I guess it must be feeling.

 

[wolfy]

Emotion. I want to feel it.

[YOUTUBE="sDW6vkuqGLg"]Finger Pointing to the Moon - Bruce Lee[/YOUTUBE]

 

[figsfiggyfigs]

Emotion. That would make me think.

 

[miss fortune]

curiosity and a sense of being there... I like landscapes and the more realistic the better... if I can hear the water or the birds or feel the sunshine and wind then it is a proper painting... I don't want to see a pretty picture, I want the sense that I really AM there I want to wonder what's behind that sand dune if I cross it or why the cow doesn't want to cross the water or why everyone is gathering to trade on the beach on such a cold and dreary day... if the picture can't evoke that I'll probably walk on by it for something better

 

[crimsonhaze]

I guess it depends on how it's presented. Most art pieces I've seen that go for pure emotion are of the knee-jerk variety. A piece that comes to mind is "Piss Christ" where a crucifix was submerged in a jar of urine. I find this kind of emotional art a load of crap.

To me the best emotional pieces are the ones you have to think about first. Only after you soak it all in does the emotion settle on you. Picasso's "Guernica" is a prime example of this.

That said, I would say "invoke thought" or "invoke thought that creates emotion".

I'll have to agree with what was said. Though I think emotions and thought-provoking art differs in the kind of art that is presented to an individual. Having said that, I'm personally interested in poetry. This differs though in how the poet writes. Coz there's a thought provoking poem and also one that's deep enough to make you feel first. But okay I guess I do go for emotion lol.

Grr it's hard. Simply put. Lol.