The Function of Art

[Dreamer]

My art:

This is insight to the barista who has had distorted his broken heart in the sadness of losing his girlfriend over spilling coffee over her in the late 20th century. It was intended to send a burst of bold emotion to the individual looking at it to provide a level of subconscious distress formulated over a period of time as the user goes about his day and remembers all the confusing emotional mattes he had dealt with in his past. And with such, everytime you speak to a barista and drink your coffee you will be filled with emotional turmoil of the troubled barista.

Do I hear 5 million? No, how about 6? I have 6. Sold! To the guy for 6 million. And the artist isn't even dead yet!

 

[Dreamer]

True, it might be more effective if the observers were free to puncture, fold and burn the piece. I think its effectiveness is in its purity, though.

I like performance art, but it is definitely harder to pin down than traditional forms of art. Since it encompasses the actions, movements, props, and interaction with the audience, over a manufactured object, how can you even begin to define art? It's as though all preconceived notions of what art was, and throws it out the window, or does it? Perhaps it's just a physical representation of what art encompasses, and if anything, is the answer to what we're seeking here?

 

[Evee]

Art uncovers, reveals, and unhides, which is the meaning of the Greek word for "truth" Alethea.

That means that truth makes art possible.

So art is truth.

 

[Dreamer]

Ok sooo...I'm going to stop posting for a bit here since I realize my comments have basically filled up their own page. Sorry!

Love this thread though, and art is one of my passions, but I'll try to contain myself

 

[á´…eparted]

Art needs no explicit purpose or function. It's an individualistic experience, and it's that individual who decides it for themselves. That's all that matters.

 

[Opal]

[MENTION=13943]Pinker85[/MENTION], no worries, I mostly wondered what the forum thought, and if different types held different opinions. Also, I posted my response a ways back in the thread.

Ok sooo...I'm going to stop posting for a bit here since I realize my comments have basically filled up their own page. Sorry!

Love this thread though, and art is one of my passions, but I'll try to contain myself

I fully support bumping this thread.

(the mods might stop you at some point, though)

 

[Dreamer]

[MENTION=13943]Pinker85[/MENTION], no worries, I mostly wondered what the forum thought, and if different types held different opinions. Also, I posted my response a ways back in the thread.



I fully support bumping this thread.

(the mods might stop you at some point, though)

Thanks for the support Opal! I love discussion and thinking up new angles and bouncing ideas off others' perspectives, and so I tend to take that same attitude towards forum sites like this, where it may not be best suited all the time. I guess a proper chat room would be best for this type of approach? But ya, I think that'd be awesome if people just kept replying to one another and got multiple parties involved on a topic such as this one, instead of just a dialogue between two people here and there as it stands now.

 

[Opal]

I don't get a lot of art while liking it. I appreciate that it takes great manual dexterity to create art, it's cool when someone can draw or sculpt something photo realistic ... but a lot of abstract art is pretty but without much meaning for me, which doesn't mean I don't appreciate it ... I just also appreciate the walls and the way light looks and how my body feels when it moves and everything surrounding the piece of art. And I don't like places I have to restrict my movements and feel very serious and somber and the like quality of holding on that art has ... u know like holding onto these pieces for posterity or like something like that, like I think things should be destroyed and open to destruction, so that new things can come out of them.

Somehow I missed this. One wonderful thing about (some) art is that it destroys (manipulates, transforms) the ideas that make up culture, like an abstract tool or weapon. I think nature deserves more reverence than most any art, but I also think human culture needs revision now more than ever.

 

[Opal]

Thanks for the support Opal! I love discussion and thinking up new angles and bouncing ideas off others' perspectives, and so I tend to take that same attitude towards forum sites like this, where it may not be best suited all the time. I guess a proper chat room would be best for this type of approach? But ya, I think that'd be awesome if people just kept replying to one another and got multiple parties involved on a topic such as this one, instead of just a dialogue between two people here and there as it stands now.

Well, forums are better suited for longer replies, but TypoC's Ventrilo server produces some great discussions. Holding onto topics can be difficult, though.

(Also, I'm not sure double/multiple-posting is against the rules in the first place, but most forums discourage it... that was the mod bit)

 

[Fluffywolf]

Art is like philosophy. It broadens our horizons and fuels our perspectives only to show us that there is nothing meaningful to see. But it is argueably better than not seeing anything at all.

 

[Qlip]

Art is essentially fashion, it encapsulates what is free and ubiquitous in ego, what it encapsulates isn't for anything, though it may provoke things. If the art is good, it'll come back through the other side.

 

[Evee]

Art is like philosophy. It broadens our horizons and fuels our perspectives only to show us that there is nothing meaningful to see. But it is argueably better than not seeing anything at all.

Meaninglessness falls within the realm of meaning because it implies that meaning is possible.

The fact that we are seeing at all is meaningful (made possible by).

 

[Beorn]

Art serves as the pursuit of beauty and thereby the pursuit of transcendence.

 

[Evee]

Art serves as the pursuit of beauty and thereby the pursuit of transcendence.

It is freedom which gives man the ability to reflect, and thus, to transcend his own condition.

 

[Beorn]

It is freedom which gives man the ability to reflect, and thus, to transcend his own condition.

And yet, it is the things that weigh man down that are worth reflecting on.

 

[Fluffywolf]

Hardship is the most powerful drive.

 

[GarrotTheThief]

The reason art has no function in any logical sense is because the soul is illogical and the function of art is reflect and illuminate the soul, or us.

Art serves both as a mirror and a light.....it can also be a distorted mirror and a blue light....it can fuck us up or heal us..

Art is powerful.

Art is used as a weapon to kill and squash the soul but it is also used as a healing agent to lift the soul and inspire...we are souls...first...so art is a snapshot of our soul and contains that energy.

But the soul can be corrupted...just because something is soulful doesn't mean it is holy.

Art can carry spirit as well...both evil and good.

I would say that comoditized art is still art, but it is evil art, and a tricky subject...for the most part.


Art is u sed to get people to do drugs, smoke cigarretes, and it's even used to justify killing, genocide and reckless abandonment.

So art is not some holy, untouchable subject. Art can be pure shit evil.

Only we, the souls, have the power to chose good and evil. Art in itself is just a husk.

 

[indra]

All of existence's potentiality resides within the noumenal.

The function of art is to tease at the threads of this realm and bring forth its seemingly limitless spectrum of phenomenon.

 

[Evee]

All of existence's potentiality resides within the noumenal.

The function of art is to tease at the threads of this realm and bring forth its seemingly limitless spectrum of phenomenon.

5 star post.

 

[Cygnus]

Refreshing our perceptions. Maintenance to our software.