How do you view art?

  On 2/20/2015 at 1:59 AM, phling said:

 

 

it can't really deal with complex topics such as, say, particle physics or computation.

is it supposed to?

are they more *complex than the human condition?

*devil's advocacy

edit for stoooooooooooned

If I'm looking for something to put in my home it needs to make sense for me. Generally, it will be immediately satisfying for me to view. I look for things I find beautiful over something poignant as well.

As far as viewing artwork for the pleasure of experiencing art then it just needs to fit a certain set of criteria to be considered "good" or enjoyable for me.

Said criteria being: craftsmanship, aesthetic impact, poignancy/witty/clever, emotionally powerful, and/or profound.

Bottom line: it just needs to make sense.

  On 2/20/2015 at 2:14 AM, cwmbrancity said:

 

  On 2/20/2015 at 1:59 AM, phling said:

it can't really deal with complex topics such as, say, particle physics or computation.

 

 

is it supposed to?

 

is it more *complex than the human condition?

 

*devil's advocacy

but most contributions come from various sciences & corporate entities. art has not really contributed a lot to the things that happen with computers.

Compare with (human scale) architecture, which has a lot of art in it. It's easy to make a thing from clay, it's hard to make an operating system. Operating systems are beyond art (currently)

edit: UNLESS you would retrospectively declare something like Linux as accidental art.

accidental art is the best art.

wendyvainity is the best accidental (?) art

lel

tbh I think this is the most genuine piece of computer art in existence:

http://youtu.be/EViG0Q4lTeA

but apparently if you do something like that you go bananas

  On 2/20/2015 at 2:40 AM, phling said:

 

  On 2/20/2015 at 2:14 AM, cwmbrancity said:

 

  On 2/20/2015 at 1:59 AM, phling said:

it can't really deal with complex topics such as, say, particle physics or computation.

 

is it supposed to?

 

is it more *complex than the human condition?

 

*devil's advocacy

 

 

accidental art is the best art.

 

to twist that slightly ;)

http://www.discogs.com/ELpH-vs-Coil-Worship-The-Glitch/release/185636

  On 2/20/2015 at 2:40 AM, phling said:

 

  On 2/20/2015 at 2:14 AM, cwmbrancity said:

 

  On 2/20/2015 at 1:59 AM, phling said:

it can't really deal with complex topics such as, say, particle physics or computation.

 

is it supposed to?

 

is it more *complex than the human condition?

 

*devil's advocacy

hm lets say computer stuff in the large seems to reveal a lot about the Human Condition these days..

but most contributions come from various sciences & corporate entities. art has not really contributed a lot to the things that happen with computers.

Compare with (human scale) architecture, which has a lot of art in it. It's easy to make a thing from clay, it's hard to make an operating system. Operating systems are beyond art (currently)

 

edit: UNLESS you would retrospectively declare something like Linux as accidental art.

accidental art is the best art.

 

What about all that seapunk jazz etc?

dunno, seems like irony applied to superficial tech themes :)

I don't know a lot about art history, but sea punk/vapor/artsy Internet memes appear to me to be lifted straight from dada or postmodernism.

how bout this:

art is usually confined to artifacts / media which can be directly experienced through human sensory apparatus (e.g. watching a video)

yet, a lot of media stuff is happening in the infrastructure layers beneath, e.g. the multitude of science & corporations that are involved in us being able to watch online videos.

so there's a lot of abstraction/indirection/complexity involved in modern media, most of which is elusive to us, yet it's highly interesting stuff! the technological/political environment in which these media exist are quite in a different realm than the one that art discourse is dealing with...

we have a ton of change right now with digital media; how it works, what it means to us. the art world does not contribute a lot.... It's well behind. corporations like Apple or Google have contributed a lot more to aesthetics in the last 10 years than any form of art...

now I don't really know for sure, but it seems to me that art used to be more significant before computers got dominant as a medium..

have you watched the old Robert Hughes doc The Shock of the New? Shame he didnt live long enough to integrate what yer sayin about computer "agency"

your point about google is a bit spurious doe

art is just some stupid word to define one proffecions from another.

fishing is art

painting is art

bakery is art

making musics is art

teaching is art

farting is art

whetever you are doing that has some result and you can compare it to other results

artist expression can be absolutely everywhere, innovating telephone is as much art as making new music genre

what is the difference between engineer and musician, or between cook and painter?

if you are a good cook you can enjoy "art" of other great cooks, and some salad can bring you tears of joy just as much as great sculpture or movie

where can one find these ,,,,,,,,,, transcendental salads......?

;)

art isnt a place, its a state of mind

That thing lumpy posted just about sums it up for me.

I really get nothing from some of the contemporary art scene stuff that's all about self-reference games and back-patting though, who gives a shit. Maybe it's mostly a local thing, probably not.

Bakery is art

Bear is hero.

Fractal is coffee.

Pain is ambidextrous.

Universe is toaster.

Platypus is Obama.

Love is chalupa.

I think engagement is the most important aspect to me. This could be visually striking, physically interactive, or just makes me think about a concept long after experiencing a piece.

If it can keep me engaged in some way, I'll appreciate it more.

  On 2/20/2015 at 4:32 PM, cwmbrancity said:

have you watched the old Robert Hughes doc The Shock of the New? Shame he didnt live long enough to integrate what yer sayin about computer "agency"

 

your point about google is a bit spurious doe

just watched the 1st ep of the old doc, and the 2004 addendum. Thanks!

  On 2/20/2015 at 4:59 PM, cwmbrancity said:

where can one find these ,,,,,,,,,, transcendental salads......?

 

;)

not in,,,,,,,,,,,,sainsbury's....i,,,fear.

i recommend reading kant's and schopenhauer's views on art and genius.

i can only say that i agree with them the most, more than with anybody else regarding the matter.

  On 2/21/2015 at 1:27 AM, chenGOD said:

 

  On 2/20/2015 at 4:59 PM, cwmbrancity said:

where can one find these ,,,,,,,,,, transcendental salads......?

 

;)

 

not in,,,,,,,,,,,,sainsbury's....i,,,fear.

 

if you ever find yerself in 1 of these gaffs, dont get the,,,,,,,,, (assumes Meaning of Life "Salmon Mousse Death-voice"),,,,,,,,,,, lettuce wedge...

http://www.ruthschris.com/menu/salad-soups/

#notmysalad

art involves subjectivity, feels, poetry, mystery & craft. it isn't a factual truth like maths or science coz it is both paradoxical & inexplicable, so 2 explain art is to betray it... much like w. a joke, or a dream.

the v. word 'art' nowadaze haz become (like the words, 'like', 'music', 'modern', 'ambient' etc.) a blur of indistinctions, meaning diff tingz 2 diff ppl - hence the temporary con of much 'contemporary' 'art'; which is olny entertainment, hype, design, decor etc. imo (:

‘what does one prefer? an art that struggles to change the social contract, but fails? or one that seeks to please and amuse, & succeeds?’ - robert hughes

‘art is not what you see, but what you make others see.’ - edgar degas

‘beauty plus pity - that is the closest we can get to a definition of art.’ - vladimir nabakov

Kinda along the lines of what Limpy said, but I don't believe art is a tangible object, but rather some kind of intangible force. I'll try not to be too boring or vague with metaphysics, but I don't only see it in paintings or illustrations. We see art in films, music, and even video games. Pretty much comes down to aesthetic approach or style I think. And yes, much of it is influenced by the artist's personal experience.

I'm not even sure if I'm making sense, because it's hard to explain. Methods and terminology can be learned, but art must be felt.