is this art?

[tisthefire]

what do you guys think?

[Prodigy54321]

I bid $300,000

[Sephus]

yes. not very impressive to me, though.

[evolvedForm]

pollack?

[Kimbell175113]

[ QUOTE ]
pollack?

[/ QUOTE ]

Yeah.

Anyway, my answer is the same as Sephus's, but the question only becomes interesting if you say no, because then you have to come up with a definition of art that includes and excludes exactly what you want, then look back and see if your definition makes any sense.

[andyfox]

We had a debate about this, I believe last year, perhaps in The Lounge, maybe OOT.

[yukoncpa]

[ QUOTE ]
I bid $300,000



[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, now it’s art. It is art as long as a person looks at it and decides it’s art. If an elephant painted the above picture and nobody was interested, then it wouldn’t be art. ( except maybe to the elephant )

[vhawk01]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I bid $300,000



[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, now it’s art. It is art as long as a person looks at it and decides it’s art. If an elephant painted the above picture and nobody was interested, then it wouldn’t be art. ( except maybe to the elephant )

[/ QUOTE ]

Then can I save everyone the trouble and just admit that I find everything to be art? Do I have to look at it, or can I just make it known that my default position is yes, its art, so when anyone asks, "Is this art?" the answer is always "Vhawk thinks its art, so yep." It would save time, and thwart philistines, so I'm willing.

[samsonite2100]

Of course it's art. It's paint on a canvas, put there by a guy who called himself an artist, right? It's art. If an elephant knocked over some paint cans and accidentally created this (although that wouldn't happen because there's actually a lot of technique and composition going on here), it might get recognized as beautiful and get sold for $300,000, but I don't think it would really be art since there'd be no intent on the elephant's part.

Shouldn't the question be "is this good art?"

[arahant]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I bid $300,000



[/ QUOTE ]

Ok, now it’s art. It is art as long as a person looks at it and decides it’s art. If an elephant painted the above picture and nobody was interested, then it wouldn’t be art. ( except maybe to the elephant )

[/ QUOTE ]

In fairness to Pollack, I think a lot of this stuff isn't really intended for mass likeability. Some of the stuff that gets made in the art community is so self-referential and/or academic that it's more like a little inside joke for a few hundred people. Makes me think of Finnegans Wake. Then a bunch of rich folks buy in to the world...

People say things like 'it's only art because it's pollack', which is true, but isn't that different from 'she's only famous because she's anna nicole'. Just one of those freaky little things in our society that amplify themselves...