Originally posted by Sicilian SausageSigh, the dogs howl into the twilight and the little caravan trundles on. . . .
Ah says the man who constanty throws stones over the wall. I repeat, the video fits perfectly the above definition of art. Your last statement does nothing to argue against this point. I'm not sure where you get you additional criteria from that art has to be experimental, but guess what? The 'skill' in the video looks pretty experimental to me. A l ...[text shortened]... it to being wrong. I think you must suffer some kind of personality disorder to be quite honest.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieIf brick-laying produces a thing of beauty then the artist is
no I have asked you a question which as yet you have sadly FAILED to even address? So bricklaying produces nothing primarily of beauty? Is that really what you are saying? or that a nail salon is an artist studio because it produces something of beauty, in this case, beautiful nails? sooo beauticians are also artists?
the architect/designer/artist who gave the brick-layer the plan.
Most artists are also skilled but there are some with little
or no skill who commission works from artisans
1 edit
Originally posted by robbie carrobieI don't get where you're coming from. Are you saying something has to have a practical purpose in order for it to involve skill? Are you saying it's only a skill if it serves some personal physical need?
sigh, personal insults, the last bastion of the truly desperate.
No the original video demonstrates a skill, but its not art . Nor do I think you can conveniently hide behind subjectivity either, its simply the same as making a wedding cake and icing it, its skillful but its not an art form and seeing that you are bereft of knowing what the dif ...[text shortened]... are following a recipe, the same as sign writing is a skill but its not an artform etc etc etc.
If it doesn't take skill to do the sand art seen in the video, then anyone could do it.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieMy layman's opinion would be that "skill" or craftsmanship knows the effect to be produced upon an audience before the fact; with "art" the artist explores unknown limits and possibilities. The title of a painting (novel or poem) is written last.
I am going to controversial here and state that its not art, beautiful and intriguing as it is, its a skill. Now before i get the obligatory hate mail I would like you to think about the difference between an art form and a skill, if there is one.
Originally posted by lemon limeNo, he is saying that it is a skill and therefore not art. I'm not sure why as he is unable to explain his logic.
I don't get where you're coming from. Are you saying something has to have a practical purpose in order for it to involve skill? Are you saying it's only a skill if it serves some personal physical need?
If it doesn't take skill to do the sand art seen in the video, then anyone could do it.
Originally posted by robbie carrobieNo the original video demonstrates a skill, but its not art .
sigh, personal insults, the last bastion of the truly desperate.
No the original video demonstrates a skill, but its not art . Nor do I think you can conveniently hide behind subjectivity either, its simply the same as making a wedding cake and icing it, its skillful but its not an art form and seeing that you are bereft of knowing what the dif ...[text shortened]... are following a recipe, the same as sign writing is a skill but its not an artform etc etc etc.
Now I'm confused... so you're saying it is a skill, but it is not art?
1 edit
Originally posted by Sicilian SausageYeah, I just now found where he said it's a skill. I must have assumed he was saying art doesn't involve skill. Maybe we should go at this from a different angle and ask him to define what art is.
No, he is saying that it is a skill and therefore not art. I'm not sure why as he is unable to explain his logic.
Oh wait, that won't work... art is a skill. Duh!
?
I give up