Is photorealistic art really "art"?

[Dr. Furface]

But producing art makes you an artist, surely.

The problem is in defining what art is, as distinct from something that’s merely artistic or creative. Most people have done things or made things that can be considered creative/artistic, but merely doing that doesn’t make them artists.

 

[Dr. Furface]

.

 

[ohmyliver]

Why? I didn't say 'good artist'. If people regularly make art, then they're an artist.

Humans are inherently creative, yes. Having done both, I'd say being a parent requires greater creativity than, say, painting, or drawing, as it's a series of sometimes urgent problems, and any solutions you may come up with will suddenly stop working as time goes on, so requires constant thinking on your feet, where as drawing or painting is an excercise in looking and breaking down what you can see in such a way you can reproduce it. I always saw Marx's concept of species being as being about our greater ability to manipulate/work our environment compared to other animals, and that ability is creativity.

I think the mystique around the term 'artist' is really unhelpful, and prevents people from making art. Especially if they come from backgrounds which aren't 'arty'. People shouldn't be asked 'what makes you think you're an artist' they should be asked 'what art are you making' for example. In my experience, people who don't make art tend to buy into this mystique much more than people who do.

 

[ohmyliver]

Art can just be about an aesthetic. It can just be pretty. That's where emotional content rather than intellectual content comes into my definition. You've conveniently ignored that very important half of my definition.

well, ignored because there's so much that humans do that fit into that half of your definition, is a hug from a friend art?

 

[Zapp Brannigan]

I'm in the Tate Modern as I type. Some very simple things are breathtaking pieces of art, and some incredibly complex works that must have taken years of dedication are... well, a bit shit really.

 

[ohmyliver]

I'm in the Tate Modern as I type. Some very simple things are breathtaking pieces of art, and some incredibly complex works that must have taken years of dedication are... well, a bit shit really.

'what is art' is a different question to 'what is good art'.

going off on a tangent, I know I mentioned Capturing The Moment | Tate Modern earlier in the thread, but look at it if you can, it's got some really good work in it. Njideka Akunyili Crosby's mixed media work is great, for example.

 

[Gromit]

well, ignored because there's so much that humans do that fit into that half of your definition, is a hug from a friend art?

To answer your own questions ask yourself about the context and you should be able to work those questions yourself.

A hug between to actors on stage who may or may not be friends (irl or the characters) could be part of art. It could be set up to convey something to the audience. Love, regret, remorse, compassion, comfort.

You keep deliberately selecting examples from non artistic context and say therefore it's not art. But if it's in an artistic context practically anything can be art.

 

[Aladdin]

That is a good example of bad art

Based on..?

 

[Orang Utan]

Based on..?

Pardon?

 

[ohmyliver]

"But if it's in an artistic context practically anything can be art." I'd disagree, since Duchamp's Fountain and 20th century conceptual art, anything can be art. That's why George Dickie's Institutional theory of art, that the only thing common to every piece of art is that it's been labeled 'art', is the only theory of art that holds water post Duchamp.

Technically I'm selecting examples of things that fit your definition but aren't considered 'art', because I think your definition is too loose to describe just 'art'.

 

[Aladdin]

You say I can’t say that but I did. It’s the sort of art that you get in hotel rooms that no one really looks at

You're kidding right?
Her colours are fantastic.

 

[Orang Utan]

You're kidding right?
Her colours are fantastic.

No, I think that sort of thing is ugly, trite and supremely uninteresting.
Would rather have a Rothko on my wall than something like that.

 

[ElizabethofYork]

No, I think that sort of thing is ugly, trite and supremely uninteresting.
Would rather have a Rothko on my wall than something like that.

Fair enough. But it's your opinion. Not a fact. It's unfair to state that it's Bad Art.

 

[Orang Utan]

Fair enough. But it's your opinion. Not a fact. It's unfair to state that it's Bad Art.

No it’s not. Why is it unfair to have an opinion?

 

[ElizabethofYork]

No it’s not. Why is it unfair to have an opinion?

It's not. You can say in your opinion it's bad art. Not make a statement that it's bad art.

 

[Orang Utan]

It's not. You can say in your opinion it's bad art. Not make a statement that it's bad art.

What’s the difference?

 

[ohmyliver]

Fair enough. But it's your opinion. Not a fact. It's unfair to state that it's Bad Art.

Why? The labels 'good' and 'bad' are just opinions. So needing to add 'in my opinion' is just a tautology.

Err, in my opinion, obviously.

 

[Aladdin]

Pardon?

I'm asking you why you think Lily Rose Burgess' art is bad art?

 

[ElizabethofYork]

What’s the difference?

What's the difference between expressing an opinion and stating something as a fact?
Seriously?

 

[Orang Utan]

I'm asking you why you think Lily Rose Burgess' art is bad art?

I’ve already said

 

[Aladdin]

No, I think that sort of thing is ugly, trite and supremely uninteresting.
Would rather have a Rothko on my wall than something like that.

I love Rothko. I love his work SO much I spent 6 months painting a small homage to him. I fully appreciated how brilliant he was layering glazes repeatedly.


But I also really appreciate Lily Rose Burgess work..because I know what she has done is bloody difficult in terms of colour choices and placements.

 

[ohmyliver]

I don't consider this Picasso to be 'good art', but that might be down to my loathing of Peppa Pig.

 

[Orang Utan]

What's the difference between expressing an opinion and stating something as a fact?
Seriously?

Yes, seriously. If someone holds an opinion, it’s a fact to them.

 

[weltweit]

I've just been looking through a whole pile of my photos and I wondered if I could post some that I consider are art. However I can't, they are all photographs and that is enough.

 

[Aladdin]

Yes, seriously. If someone holds an opinion, it’s a fact to them.

But surely an opinion needs to be well informed?

 

[Orang Utan]

But surely an opinion needs to be well informed?

It depends what you mean. Well-informed to one person could be the opposite to someone else.

 

[prunus]

You say I can’t say that but I did. It’s the sort of art that you get in hotel rooms that no one really looks at

I didn't say you can't say that, I said that it cannot be said (by you or anyone else) declaratively, ie as an absolute declaration or pronouncement of truth. The most you can really can say is that you don't like it, which is of course a valid opinion, and one you can certainly profess. Even a professional art critic, who may be able to point out defects in aspects of eg the compostion, brushwork, and so on, which in their opinion make it 'bad art' is simply expressing their opinion that they don't like it, albeit with some appeals to authority to back it up. But neither they nor you nor anyone else can (usefully) equate 'bad' art with 'art I don't like' (and the converse) - as given the variety of human opinions there will be someone who does like and someone who doesn't like any thing that purports to be art, meaning that every artwork in the world becomes simultaneously defined as 'good' and 'bad'. Which is obviously meaningless.

 

[prunus]

Yes, seriously. If someone holds an opinion, it’s a fact to them.

I think you may have just encapsulated everything that is broken in our post truth social media world

 

[Aladdin]

It depends what you mean. Well-informed to one person could be the opposite to someone else.

Well informed usually means based on some expertise.

I would have thought you might enjoy her art as it is so colourful and she used complimentary and primary colours in a really energetic way.

 

[weltweit]

And, I would be happy to be known as a photographer, I would prefer that to an artist, and it would be more accurate.