What Do You Think of Abstract Art? - Page 5
Join the #1 Art Workshop - LevelUpJoin Premium Art Workshop

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast
Results 121 to 150 of 158

Thread: What Do You Think of Abstract Art?

  1. #121
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Western Michigan
    Posts
    48
    Thanks
    12
    Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    What art is and what makes for good or bad art has never been universally established and will never be determined as long as there is freedom of thought and expression.

    Art by definition denotes "A superior skill." But who or what determines what is "superior?" Is "superior" subjectively subject to any one generation's view of "superior?" Is art not relative?

    If good art is determined objectively by a certain generation, than where are the examples by which all art of all time is measured/judged? What generation is that authority and who of that generation is the supreme authority who determined these examples?

    When someone (or group) says a certain work of art is good or bad, that person is saying that he (and maybe his group) are the ultimate and finale authority for that particular art form for all time. I say this thinking is the ultimate in egotistic hogwash. For some reason certain "knowledgeable" art critics come to mind here.

    I love art and most artists I've met. But art is filled with so much baloney today it's beyond belief.

    Do what you feel you must do. Those who like it will reward you and those who don't--don't matter.

    Last edited by bigpanfish; February 27th, 2011 at 08:29 PM.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  2. #122
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    3,432
    Thanks
    643
    Thanked 1,484 Times in 719 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Last edited by Flake; February 27th, 2011 at 08:26 PM.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  3. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Flake For This Useful Post:


  4. #123
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    1,972
    Thanks
    1,331
    Thanked 1,923 Times in 757 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Absolutely bang on the money Flake! Precisely why it is so dangerous to consider 'abstraction' to be a separate genre.

    From Gegarin's point of view
    http://www.chrisbennettartist.co.uk/
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  5. #124
    Join Date
    Dec 2002
    Location
    Aotearoa (NZ)
    Posts
    1,308
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 1,329 Times in 271 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    I don't mind Abstract art as long as there is some genuine skill, craftmanship, passion and vision driving it and not some attention seeking hipster shoving spagettios up her c*nt and pissing it out infront of a crowd of clapping retards.

    I know, slightly elitist statement, but fcuk man this is my life and passion! I hate it when shit like that gets a worthy mention, it's a spit in the face. Trollin' mofos.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  6. #125
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,888
    Thanks
    752
    Thanked 3,153 Times in 1,067 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Rusty View Post
    I know, slightly elitist statement, but fcuk man this is my life and passion! I hate it when shit like that gets a worthy mention, it's a spit in the face. Trollin' mofos.
    According to this thread you're just jelly of their awesome art prowess or because they're rich. Player hater!

    "Astronomy offers an aesthetic indulgence not duplicated in any other field. This is not an academic or hypothetical attraction and should require no apologies, for the beauty to be found in the skies has been universally appreciated for unrecorded centuries."
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  7. #126
    Join Date
    Jun 2003
    Location
    Olympia, WA USA
    Posts
    2,012
    Thanks
    1,860
    Thanked 486 Times in 325 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    I dislike the idea of contemporary approval. Just because someone in 12th century Christian-dominated Europe doesn't like Tibetan Thangkas because they are products of people they would do harm to classically in response to the act of creating an image of Mahakala, doesn't invalidate the art form.

    I have a very low opinion of public opinion. The individual, not the collectivist is the only proper judge of what is good art if we are to judge at all.

    sehertu mannu narāṭu ina pānāt šagapīru ningishzidda
    abrahadabra
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  8. #127
    Join Date
    Apr 2005
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    2,888
    Thanks
    752
    Thanked 3,153 Times in 1,067 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Naomi Ningishzidda View Post
    I have a very low opinion of public opinion. The individual, not the collectivist is the only proper judge of what is good art if we are to judge at all.
    Where would art be without a collection of individuals?

    "Astronomy offers an aesthetic indulgence not duplicated in any other field. This is not an academic or hypothetical attraction and should require no apologies, for the beauty to be found in the skies has been universally appreciated for unrecorded centuries."
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  9. #128
    kev ferrara is offline Registered User Level 17 Gladiator: Spartacus' Dimachaeri
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Fallingwater
    Posts
    5,059
    Thanks
    1,516
    Thanked 5,150 Times in 1,700 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    RANDIS... when is a chair not art?

    At least Icarus tried!


    My Process: Dead Rider Graphic Novel (Dark Horse Comics) plus oil paintings, pencils and other goodies:
    http://www.conceptart.org/forums/sho...d.php?t=101106

    My "Smilechild" Music. Plus a medley of Commercial Music Cues and a Folksy Jingle!:
    http://www.myspace.com/kevferrara
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  10. #129
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    522
    Thanks
    76
    Thanked 177 Times in 139 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris Bennett View Post
    Absolutely bang on the money Flake! Precisely why it is so dangerous to consider 'abstraction' to be a separate genre.
    We should always separate the line between art that uses abstract shapes on their own to convey messages or emotions and art using bravado brushstrokes that have all the characteristics of abstract shapes but intend to be representational. Non objective would be better for the title than " abstract"

    "A drawing is not necessarily academic because it is thorough, but only because it is dead. Neither is a drawing necessarily academic because it is done in what is called a conventional style, any more than it is good because it is done in an unconventional style. The test is whether it has life and conveys genuine feeling."- Harold Speed
    [[Sketchbook]]
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  11. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to The Pariano For This Useful Post:


  12. #130
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Corpus Christi TX
    Posts
    264
    Thanks
    112
    Thanked 94 Times in 57 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by bigpanfish View Post

    When someone (or group) says a certain work of art is good or bad, that person is saying that he (and maybe his group) are the ultimate and finale authority for that particular art form for all time.
    This is where you're wrong.

    Without that assumption, you will find critics much easier to deal with.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  13. #131
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Western Michigan
    Posts
    48
    Thanks
    12
    Thanked 4 Times in 4 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Robotus View Post
    This is where you're wrong.

    Without that assumption, you will find critics much easier to deal with.
    Thanks for the comment.

    Last edited by bigpanfish; February 28th, 2011 at 07:53 PM.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  14. #132
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    2
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Kamber Parrk View Post
    By analogy, let us conceive of an "invalid" item-- a hammer made of chocolate.

    Such a hammer would not be sound or effective-- it would fall apart upon striking nails and would melt in your hand.

    The chocolate hammer is not "valid" because it utterly fails in the role of a hammer-- pounding nails.
    You do realize that nothing in this world has any inherent validity, role or value right? Those are attributes assigned from the outside, they're not immanent in things. Taking your analogy as an example, the "role" of a hammer is not pounding nails. Although the creator intended to use it for that purpose, "pounding nails" is just one of the the many possible, equally legitimate uses that were and are still assigned to it. It may be the prevalent or most popular way of handling a hammer, but that doesn't say all that much. The masses' choice after all is still nothing but a collection of the same subjective preference...

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  15. #133
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    WA State
    Posts
    2,364
    Thanks
    796
    Thanked 1,273 Times in 887 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Yuushou View Post
    You do realize that nothing in this world has any inherent validity, role or value right? Those are attributes assigned from the outside, they're not immanent in things. Taking your analogy as an example, the "role" of a hammer is not pounding nails. Although the creator intended to use it for that purpose, "pounding nails" is just one of the the many possible, equally legitimate uses that were and are still assigned to it. It may be the prevalent or most popular way of handling a hammer, but that doesn't say all that much. The masses' choice after all is still nothing but a collection of the same subjective preference...
    Oh crap. . . necrothread!

    Lemme down a couple more vodka tonics and I'll get back t'ya. . .

    M,kay!

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  16. #134
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    New Zealand
    Posts
    141
    Thanks
    3
    Thanked 8 Times in 8 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Hmm. Why do people hate it, theres nothing to hate really all art is acceptable and has their own creative thoughts and experience happening in their own way. Abstract art is not easy, its all about the finish product what kind of outcome is it. What do you want people to feel. Please see this artist Jeff soto https://www.google.co.nz/search?hl=e...A82fiAeA14GYDQ He is amazing. He started doing graffiti before all this painting. I think abstract comes with knowledge how to interpret something without making it look like what it should. Making a whole journing leading to another. Does it matter if your realism or serealism even or pop art, caricature, not really much different. The outcomes are the same, all about grabing the audiences attention and telling us what they see in a piece of artwork. I don't like it when people say abstract looks easy or boring, its not that cool. Art overall is motivation, what drives the art itself, what makes it art. I started to learn abstract painting in high school very basic and that has got me doing the things i love in the future which is life drawing, anime , 3D, sculpting etc ----All play a part----

    Last edited by eru; November 11th, 2012 at 10:01 PM. Reason: spelling error
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  17. #135
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Boise, ID
    Posts
    1,238
    Thanks
    889
    Thanked 1,535 Times in 567 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    If we are going to so this again maybe we need definitions. I am going to bed but I'm sure Tristan or someone will oblige. Jeff Soto's work is not abstract.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  18. #136
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Pasadena, CA
    Posts
    3,330
    Thanks
    173
    Thanked 874 Times in 529 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    We could make the thread itself abstract. lakghfyakfnblqekngpo13yt098 7utpo2i nt9d6g9fdhjfrek3\ n brtyhghdrt6fgfszaweraqaSXDCFVCDFVGGVFGBHHBGH;APW34[WP45-094-01Ikbjcyt2

    4!

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  19. #137
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    New York, NY, USA 10002
    Posts
    883
    Thanks
    800
    Thanked 305 Times in 212 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    The problem with abstract art is that we cannot judge craftsmanship, skill, or discipline.

    With representational art, you can see the blood and sweat by how much the artist understands light, form, perspective, anatomy, painting, drawing, etc.

    You can't do that with abstract art. You can't tell the difference between a Dee Kooning's abstract painting and a Children's abstract painting, or even some of those random brush works done by an elephant or chimpanzee. There exists no standard to judge abstraction.

    Using abstraction to convey realism is one thing, but using abstraction for the sake of abstract art is another. Abstraction to convey realism is more difficult than abstraction for the sake of abstraction.

    Ultimately, I see why some might conclude about the use of abstraction in realism to justify the "difficulties" of abstract art, but I disagree in that it takes as much skill to create purely abstract art as to create a painting that uses abstraction to convey realism or stylized realism as the case may be.

    Last edited by Vay; November 11th, 2012 at 11:02 PM.
    My Sketchbook

    Twinkle, twinkle little star
    I don't wonder what you are
    For by spectroscopic ken
    I know that you are hydrogen - Ian D.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  20. #138
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    WA State
    Posts
    2,364
    Thanks
    796
    Thanked 1,273 Times in 887 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Yuushou View Post
    You do realize that nothing in this world has any inherent validity, role or value right? Those are attributes assigned from the outside, they're not immanent in things. Taking your analogy as an example, the "role" of a hammer is not pounding nails. Although the creator intended to use it for that purpose, "pounding nails" is just one of the the many possible, equally legitimate uses that were and are still assigned to it. It may be the prevalent or most popular way of handling a hammer, but that doesn't say all that much. The masses' choice after all is still nothing but a collection of the same subjective preference...

    Anyway, having been a bit priggish to Randis in this thread, lets start with some definitions:

    Definition of VALID

    1
    : having legal efficacy or force; especially : executed with the proper legal authority and formalities <a valid contract>
    2
    a : well-grounded or justifiable : being at once relevant and meaningful <a valid theory>
    b : logically correct <a valid argument> <valid inference>
    3
    : appropriate to the end in view : effective <every craft has its own valid methods>
    4
    of a taxon : conforming to accepted principles of sound biological classification


    You do realize that nothing in this world has any inherent validity, role or value right?
    Wrong! My cells contain intricate DNA information that will not combine with sheep, goats or overstuffed easy chairs. Thus, my genetics are not VALID to create a Kamber-sheep, a Kamber-goat, or a Kamber-chair. THUS, my DNA is ONLY inherently VALID in combining with other humans such as myself. The role of my DNA IS assigned from within and IS an "immanent" quality of myself in relation to all humanity.

    The role of a hammer IS pounding nails. Other roles, such as use as a weapon or a paperweight, are either inferior, ancillary, or incidental.

    And. . . a Chocolate Hammer just ain't a hammer at all. . . .

    Last edited by Kamber Parrk; November 12th, 2012 at 03:31 AM. Reason: form
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  21. #139
    Elwell's Avatar
    Elwell is offline Sticks Like Grim Death Level 17 Gladiator: Spartacus' Dimachaeri
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Hudson River valley, NY
    Posts
    16,212
    Thanks
    4,879
    Thanked 16,666 Times in 5,020 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Yuushou View Post
    You do realize that nothing in this world has any inherent validity, role or value right? Those are attributes assigned from the outside, they're not immanent in things. Taking your analogy as an example, the "role" of a hammer is not pounding nails. Although the creator intended to use it for that purpose, "pounding nails" is just one of the the many possible, equally legitimate uses that were and are still assigned to it. It may be the prevalent or most popular way of handling a hammer, but that doesn't say all that much. The masses' choice after all is still nothing but a collection of the same subjective preference...
    Unnecessary necro. Been there, done that.


    Tristan Elwell
    **Finished Work Thread **Process Thread **Edges Tutorial

    Crash Course for Artists, Illustrators, and Cartoonists, NYC, the 2013 Edition!

    "Work is more fun than fun."
    -John Cale

    "Art is supposed to punch you in the brain, and it's supposed to stay punched."
    -Marc Maron
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  22. The Following User Says Thank You to Elwell For This Useful Post:


  23. #140
    Elwell's Avatar
    Elwell is offline Sticks Like Grim Death Level 17 Gladiator: Spartacus' Dimachaeri
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Hudson River valley, NY
    Posts
    16,212
    Thanks
    4,879
    Thanked 16,666 Times in 5,020 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Vay View Post
    The problem with abstract art is that we cannot judge craftsmanship, skill, or discipline.
    I disagree.


    Tristan Elwell
    **Finished Work Thread **Process Thread **Edges Tutorial

    Crash Course for Artists, Illustrators, and Cartoonists, NYC, the 2013 Edition!

    "Work is more fun than fun."
    -John Cale

    "Art is supposed to punch you in the brain, and it's supposed to stay punched."
    -Marc Maron
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  24. The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Elwell For This Useful Post:


  25. #141
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    2
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Kamber Parrk View Post
    Anyway, having been a bit priggish to Randis in this thread, lets start with some definitions:

    Definition of VALID

    1
    : having legal efficacy or force; especially : executed with the proper legal authority and formalities <a valid contract>
    2
    a : well-grounded or justifiable : being at once relevant and meaningful <a valid theory>
    b : logically correct <a valid argument> <valid inference>
    3
    : appropriate to the end in view : effective <every craft has its own valid methods>
    4
    of a taxon : conforming to accepted principles of sound biological classification
    First of all, what's a definition to you? Do you know what conventions are?


    Quote Originally Posted by Kamber Parrk View Post
    Wrong! My cells contain intricate DNA information that will not combine with sheep, goats or overstuffed easy chairs. Thus, my genetics are not VALID to create a Kamber-sheep, a Kamber-goat, or a Kamber-chair. THUS, my DNA is ONLY inherently VALID in combining with other humans such as myself. The role of my DNA IS assigned from within and IS an "immanent" quality of myself in relation to all humanity.

    The role of a hammer IS pounding nails. Other roles, such as use as a weapon or a paperweight, are either inferior, ancillary, or incidental.

    And. . . a Chocolate Hammer just ain't a hammer at all. . . .
    That sentence is very unscientific. There is no immanent role of a DNA; no scientist would say that it is "against the function of a human DNA" if it combined with something else than another human. One would simply speak of a causal consequence that occured because of specific circumstances. You'd know if you were a biology major.

    Who decides what makes another use ancillary? And why does something being incidental imply that it is a mere siderole? Many important tools in human history were created by accident.
    And why are they inferior? What makes them inferior, except for the fact that they are not as commonly used as other roles? Nothing. Looking at a hammer does not tell you what to do with it; if you threw it into outer space and some alien would somehow catch it I bet that he would sure as hell not use it as intended.

    And please don't answer with "just cause!".

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  26. #142
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Location
    New York, NY, USA 10002
    Posts
    883
    Thanks
    800
    Thanked 305 Times in 212 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Elwell View Post


    Well there really is no standard on what abstract art is, so maybe me saying you can't judge craftsmanship is an overshoot. The term "abstract art" is so vague that you can argue that all of representational art is abstract art. Specifically, the truth of the matter I have implied, aims at artworks with the messy brush strokes from Flake's post. You can't judge craftsmanship there.

    Just because there exists some types of abstract art that shows craftsmanship, skill, and discipline, this does not mean all abstract art shows craftsmanship, skill, and discipline. Representational art, on the other hand, is consistent in this order; you can always judge craftsmanship, skill, and discipline. When you see someone attempt to draw a figure stylistically or realistically, you can automatically judge his or her skill level.

    Some guy stared at a blank canvas for a few months, sure he is disciplined if he actually sat there for months, but how can we judge the craftsmanship, the skill level, or the discipline even?

    How about those 8 year old "prodigies"? How can you tell the difference between a messy painting of one artist from another?

    Last edited by Vay; November 12th, 2012 at 05:57 PM.
    My Sketchbook

    Twinkle, twinkle little star
    I don't wonder what you are
    For by spectroscopic ken
    I know that you are hydrogen - Ian D.
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  27. #143
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Near Philly, US
    Posts
    338
    Thanks
    80
    Thanked 260 Times in 129 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Read ‘The Painted Word' by Tom Wolfe.
    It may result in an appreciation for what Abstract Art IS, or it my generate a greater level of hatred for it.

    My thoughts on Abstract Art resonate with this line from ‘The Painted Word’:
    “…for Modern Art has become completely literary: the paintings and other works exist only to illustrate the text[theory].”

    Excerpt from page 2:
    "... a review [1974], it was, by the Time’s [New York Times] dean of the arts, Hilton Kramer, of an exhibition at Yale University of “Seven Realists,” seven realistic painters . . . when I was jerked alert by the following:
    “Realism does not lack its partisans, but it does rather conspicuously lack a persuasive theory. And given the nature of our intellectual commerce with works of art, to lack a persuasive theory is to lack something crucial—the means by which our experience of individual works is joined to our understanding of the values they signify.”
    Now, you may say, My God, man! You woke up over that? You forsook your blissful coma over a mere swell in the sea of words?
    But I knew what I was looking at. I realized that without making the slightest effort I had come upon one of those utterances in search of which psychoanalysts and State Department monitors of the Moscow or Belgrade press are willing to endure a lifetime of tedium: namely, the seemingly innocuous obiter dicta, the words in passing, that give the game away.
    What I saw before me was the critic-in-chief of The New York Times saying: In looking at a painting today, “to lack a persuasive theory is to lack something crucial.” I read it again. It didn’t say “something helpful” or “enriching” or even “extremely valuable.” No, the word was crucial.
    In short: frankly, these days, without a theory to go with it, I can’t see a painting."

    http://www.billemory.com/NOTES/wolfe.html

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  28. #144
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Mölndal, Sweden
    Posts
    2,773
    Thanks
    2,379
    Thanked 1,911 Times in 832 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    “…for Modern Art has become completely literary: the paintings and other works exist only to illustrate the text[theory].”
    But now you're talking about post-modernism. Not abstract painting.

    "I've got ham, but I'm not a hamster"

    Sketchy Link

    Portfolio
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  29. #145
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    72
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 11 Times in 11 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by bigpanfish View Post
    Is abstract art...art?
    The art isn't art, if it isn't funded on abstraction.
    The abstracting process allows you to express yourself, in the first place.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  30. #146
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Caracas
    Posts
    734
    Thanks
    261
    Thanked 1,191 Times in 293 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    What is art?

    Baby, don´t hurt me...

    Don´t hurt me...

    no more...

    BUMBUMBUMBUMBUMUN ♪

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  31. #147
    Join Date
    Sep 2012
    Location
    Near Philly, US
    Posts
    338
    Thanks
    80
    Thanked 260 Times in 129 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by tobbA View Post
    But now you're talking about post-modernism. Not abstract painting.
    Though a little brief and a little vague around the edges, how did you forge that out of what I did say?

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  32. #148
    kev ferrara is offline Registered User Level 17 Gladiator: Spartacus' Dimachaeri
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    Fallingwater
    Posts
    5,059
    Thanks
    1,516
    Thanked 5,150 Times in 1,700 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    The definitions of either modernism or postmodernism are not see easy to set, and there are hordes of art works that can be classified as both modern and postmodern.

    A sensible standard for abstract art might be the following: Is it as good as Stravinsky at being abstract art?

    At least Icarus tried!


    My Process: Dead Rider Graphic Novel (Dark Horse Comics) plus oil paintings, pencils and other goodies:
    http://www.conceptart.org/forums/sho...d.php?t=101106

    My "Smilechild" Music. Plus a medley of Commercial Music Cues and a Folksy Jingle!:
    http://www.myspace.com/kevferrara
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  33. #149
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    WA State
    Posts
    2,364
    Thanks
    796
    Thanked 1,273 Times in 887 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by Yuushou View Post
    First of all, what's a definition to you? Do you know what conventions are?




    That sentence is very unscientific. There is no immanent role of a DNA; no scientist would say that it is "against the function of a human DNA" if it combined with something else than another human. One would simply speak of a causal consequence that occured because of specific circumstances. You'd know if you were a biology major.

    Who decides what makes another use ancillary? And why does something being incidental imply that it is a mere siderole? Many important tools in human history were created by accident.
    And why are they inferior? What makes them inferior, except for the fact that they are not as commonly used as other roles? Nothing. Looking at a hammer does not tell you what to do with it; if you threw it into outer space and some alien would somehow catch it I bet that he would sure as hell not use it as intended.

    And please don't answer with "just cause!".
    [Am I really continuing to participate in this thread? Yes, I guess I am. . . I suppose I find stuff like this vaguely more interesting than doing a Sudoku or the midweek NYT Crossword. . . ]

    So Yuushou,

    I'll take my "definitions" from Mr. Webster, or perhaps Mr. Merriam in his online incarnation. Thus, I'll define CONVENTION for you:

    1
    a : agreement, contract
    b : an agreement between states for regulation of matters affecting all of them
    c : a compact between opposing commanders especially concerning prisoner exchange or armistice
    d : a general agreement about basic principles or procedures; also : a principle or procedure accepted as true or correct by convention
    2
    a : the summoning or convening of an assembly
    b : an assembly of persons met for a common purpose; especially : a meeting of the delegates of a political party for the purpose of formulating a platform and selecting candidates for office
    c : the usually state or national organization of a religious denomination
    3
    a : usage or custom especially in social matters
    b : a rule of conduct or behavior
    c : a practice in bidding or playing that conveys information between partners in a card game (as bridge)
    d : an established technique, practice, or device (as in the theater)
    See convention defined for English-language learners »
    See convention defined for kids »


    And, well put VALID back up on the board for you as well:

    Definition of VALID

    1: having legal efficacy or force; especially : executed with the proper legal authority and formalities <a valid contract>
    2
    a : well-grounded or justifiable : being at once relevant and meaningful <a valid theory>
    b : logically correct <a valid argument> <valid inference>
    3: appropriate to the end in view : effective <every craft has its own valid methods>
    4: of a taxon : conforming to accepted principles of sound biological classification


    And, finally, lets throw in IMMANENT

    1: indwelling, inherent <beauty is not something imposed but something immanent — Anthony Burgess>
    2: being within the limits of possible experience or knowledge — compare transcendent
    — im·ma·nent·ly adverb


    If you are satisfied that I have answered your preliminary questions, we can move on from here.

    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

  34. #150
    OmenSpirits's Avatar
    OmenSpirits is offline Commercial-Illustrator in-training, NOT an artist. Level 13 Gladiator: Retiarius
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Birth Place of the World, NYC
    Posts
    2,826
    Thanks
    2,622
    Thanked 1,042 Times in 680 Posts
    Follows
    0
    Following
    0
    What defines abstract art as being art?

    Whoever is paying for it to be produced.

    You commission me to create, I create. You pay, and you can call it art.

    So it is art.

    So what if art is being produced without a client, is it still called art or practice?


    DISCUSS!

    "Everything must serve the idea. The means used to convey the idea should be the simplest and clear. Just what is required. No extra images. To me this is a universal principle of art. Saying as much as possible with a minimum of means."
    -John Huston, Director
    Reply With Quote Reply With Quote  

Page 5 of 6 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 6 LastLast

Members who have read this thread: 2

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •