Posted: Jul 02, 2014 1:33 am
by THWOTH
jamest wrote:
Goldenmane wrote:
Nicko wrote:
OlivierK wrote:Sure, it's art. I don't think any of the facebook comments comment on its artistic value, though. (I'm not surprised, because there's not a hell of a lot of art beyond the text there.)


Again, the artwork that Banksy has created consists of reposting an image of some graffiti on his facebook page, thus generating controversy. The shitfight is part of the artwork. This exchange that we are having right now is part of the artwork.


Exactly.

That's bollocks, since it essentially equates anything which has caused heated discussion to be art. That would include science and maths. In other words, it would include everything. And at that juncture, the meaning of art becomes lost and art becomes obsolete as a meaningful concept.

Can art not consist in its purpose? If something is generated for artistic purposes, if it is artistically purposed as it were, then isn't that some-thing an art work? There's no reason that thing has to be a made object, and there's no particular reason why we should give the artist laurels, and revere their creation, or like it, or agree with it's purpose, or withhold criticism of its execution, etc.

Of course, we have to have some conception of the purpose of art to do this, but in that we can rely on our ideas about what art is and what does for us, and for society.

There's no grand purpose to Art however, no single, over-arching, put-you-finger-on-it definition of what it is and what it is for. Instead these things can be teased out in terms of our reactions to individual artworks themselves.

Image