if so where does the gory non appealing ie, not easy on the eye art, stand?
Is art decorative?
if so where does the gory non appealing ie, not easy on the eye art, stand?
it may never try
but when it does it sigh
it is just that
good
it fly
Art is a funny word. Most people usually use it only in regard to fine arts, but the fundamental meaning is something that was produced by deliberate, human activity, as opposed to nature. Art, in the broad sense, includes everything from painting to buildings to firearms to spaceships to industrial machinery. I don't like using that word without a modifier, even though most people take unmodified art to refer to fine arts, I know that it also means the mechanical arts, and so forth. If you want to duscuss decorative arts, then use the modifier.
I think these are two different concepts. I see art or the fine arts as the best of the multiple cultural expressions representative in a deeper more general sense of a certain period (Romanticism, Realism, Parnasianism, Modernism, etc) and a certain enviroment. Art and with it the very concept of what is art changes acompany the other cultural changes. It may be beautiful or/and grotesc, harmonious or jarring, translate fullness as well as emptiness of feelings...
Decoration IMO may be artistical or not. There are different styles of decoration. Decoration is strongly related to space and to those that own and/or inhabit this space. I may enjoy a famous painting in a museum or an art catalogue, but that doesnīt always mean that I want to have that picture hanging in my drawing room.
Thanks for putting my ideas in motion at the end of a cold and rainy day, Cacian.
Last edited by Danik 2016; 05-18-2016 at 09:31 PM.
"I seemed to have sensed also from an early age that some of my experiences as a reader would change me more as a person than would many an event in the world where I sat and read. "
Gerald Murnane, Tamarisk Row
deeper sense??Originally Posted by Danik 2016
it may never try
but when it does it sigh
it is just that
good
it fly
Art... "Fine Art"... the "Visual Arts"... painting, drawing, print, sculpture, etc... CAN be decorative... and sometimes works that were created without any decorative intention can be seen as decorative by others:
Beware of the man with just one book. -Ovid
The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the man who can't read them.- Mark Twain
My Blog: Of Delicious Recoil
http://stlukesguild.tumblr.com/
I mean that good art is never superficial: it my be a delight to the senses or a punch in the stomach. But one getīs the feeling that it always hits the nail.
(I donīt know why the quote isnīt showing as quote)
Last edited by Danik 2016; 05-19-2016 at 09:38 AM.
"I seemed to have sensed also from an early age that some of my experiences as a reader would change me more as a person than would many an event in the world where I sat and read. "
Gerald Murnane, Tamarisk Row
I do not understand these images.Art... "Fine Art"... the "Visual Arts"... painting, drawing, print, sculpture, etc... CAN be decorative... and sometimes works that were created without any decorative intention can be seen as decorative by others:
there painting and then there is a person posing in front of it,
is that art?
it may never try
but when it does it sigh
it is just that
good
it fly
is there a difference between art and the nee to embellish?
colours interject beauty and sophistication intense and light and art relies on it.
any battle portrayed instantanly loses the gruesome rattle because colours soften and settle at the same time.
is one missing the point?
not at all and thank you to you for taking time to reflect and postThanks for putting my ideas in motion at the end of a cold and rainy day, Cacian.
Last edited by cacian; 05-19-2016 at 04:48 AM.
it may never try
but when it does it sigh
it is just that
good
it fly
a modifier. what is that?
it may never try
but when it does it sigh
it is just that
good
it fly
An adjective, something to describe the thing more. For example, in fine arts fine modifies art by restricting the mean from all arts to just fine arts.
[QUOTE=Danik 2016;1318397]You didn't close the quote with "]".
Thanks, Peter! Now it is ok.
Last edited by Danik 2016; 05-19-2016 at 09:39 AM.
"I seemed to have sensed also from an early age that some of my experiences as a reader would change me more as a person than would many an event in the world where I sat and read. "
Gerald Murnane, Tamarisk Row
Yes, Cacian, I think there is a difference. Art, specially modern art is often grotesc, ugly and sometimes even cruel. But you feel it hits the mark. I have a book by Umberto Eco I like very much called On Ugliness a sort of sequel to his History of Beauty. which focuses on the "negative" features of art and their changes in the perspective of art history.is there a difference between art and the nee to embellish?
colours interject beauty and sophistication intense and light and art relies on it.
any battle portrayed instantanly loses the gruesome rattle because colours soften and settle at the same time.
is one missing the point?
not at all and thank you to you for taking time to reflect and post
If any one is interested, here are some of his lectures on the subject:
http://videolectures.net/cd07_eco_thu/
I havenīt reflected much on decoration, but to me it is more fashion bound, while good art leaves a more lasting impression. It also aimes to be the expression of the inhabitants of the spaces, whose tastes are not necessarily always highly artistic. In fact they usually are not. For example, someone might want to fill his/her rooms with pictures of flowers because he/she loves flowers without much concern if the pictures are artistic or not.
Last edited by Danik 2016; 05-19-2016 at 10:22 AM.
"I seemed to have sensed also from an early age that some of my experiences as a reader would change me more as a person than would many an event in the world where I sat and read. "
Gerald Murnane, Tamarisk Row
.....
Last edited by Danik 2016; 05-19-2016 at 10:23 AM.
"I seemed to have sensed also from an early age that some of my experiences as a reader would change me more as a person than would many an event in the world where I sat and read. "
Gerald Murnane, Tamarisk Row
I do not understand these images.
there painting and then there is a person posing in front of it,
is that art?
The paintings seen here are by Jackson Pollock. Among the Abstract Expressionists (of whom Pollock was a leading figure) the term "decorative" was almost as much of an anathema as "illustrative" or "literary"/"narrative". Art, it was argued, was to convey deep internal feelings through the use of purely abstract elements such as line, shape, color, gesture, texture, etc... without relying upon "non-Art" elements such as the illusion of visual "reality" or the use of narrative. In this manner it was to become akin to music... inspiring an emotional response without any thought of "meaning".
These photographs, taken by Cecil Beaton for Vogue Magazine took all the serious intentions of Pollock's paintings and reduced them to a decorative backdrop for a fashion shoot. My intention was to point out that regardless of the artist's intentions, art is often reduced to something decorative. The whole of abstraction... regardless of how high-minded the original intentions of the artists... has become the decorative art de rigueur of modern corporations. Such art suggests that the corporation in question is modern... progressive-thinking, while at the same time, the absence of any subject matter allows the corporate collector to avoid the potential of offending anyone.
Beware of the man with just one book. -Ovid
The man who doesn't read good books has no advantage over the man who can't read them.- Mark Twain
My Blog: Of Delicious Recoil
http://stlukesguild.tumblr.com/
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
