Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
Forums
New posts
Forum list
Search forums
Leaderboards
Games
Our Blog
Blogs
New entries
New comments
Blog list
Search blogs
Credits
Transactions
Shop
Blessings: ✟0.00
Tickets
Open new ticket
Watched
Donate
Log in
Register
Search
Search titles only
By:
Search titles only
By:
More options
Toggle width
Share this page
Share this page
Share
Reddit
Pinterest
Tumblr
WhatsApp
Email
Share
Link
Menu
Install the app
Install
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
The Kitchen Sink
What is the Philosophy of Art?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Tuur" data-source="post: 77655683" data-attributes="member: 445885"><p>A classic example is Ray Bradbury and <em>Fahrenheit 451</em>. Bradbury wrote it as a comment on the effect of television. But when he explained this in a lecture at a college (maybe USC), the students told him it was about censorship. Bradbury was the author so he should know what it's about. But while I respected Bradbury's skill, he didn't successfully convey the meaning through the medium.</p><p></p><p>There are limits. There was a Charles Addams cartoon where his "Fester" character sat in movie theater. Everyone around him was sad and some were crying. "Fester," however, was clearly amused. What most found heart-wrenching, he found hilarious. That was the gag but is essentially "Fester" was seeing the film through his own lens.</p><p></p><p>Another cartoon, artist unknown: A couple is looking at a modern art sculpture of a stylized human figure with a large hole in the middle. The caption was "That reminds me: Did you pack the sandwiches?" The gag is both about modern art and the feelings it evokes, but there's the question of what the sculptor intended to evoke and did he or she succeed.</p><p></p><p>This isn't about blatant messaging: It's about conveying what the artist intends. A artist who intends to convey a sense of awe fails if most who see it giggle.</p><p></p><p>So much of art is also based on shared experience to convey a message, such as the "theatre of the mind" aspect of humorous cartooning. If the person who sees the art has a different shared experience, the meaning can be lost. On some carved atlatl throwers from Europe there's an odd motif on the end that fits into the spear socket. Photos I've seen of it are stunning but no one knows what it means. It could have been a prehistoric joke, possibly with crude humor connotations or maybe even a visual pun, but no one in our era knows. What the carvers wished to convey has been lost because we aren't of the same culture.</p><p></p><p>To be honest, much of art is and has been, what will sell. Douglas Adams penned in one of the <em>Hitchhiker</em> books "If it means taking the money and run, I for one could use the exercise," and that's probably what goes on most of the time.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Tuur, post: 77655683, member: 445885"] A classic example is Ray Bradbury and [I]Fahrenheit 451[/I]. Bradbury wrote it as a comment on the effect of television. But when he explained this in a lecture at a college (maybe USC), the students told him it was about censorship. Bradbury was the author so he should know what it's about. But while I respected Bradbury's skill, he didn't successfully convey the meaning through the medium. There are limits. There was a Charles Addams cartoon where his "Fester" character sat in movie theater. Everyone around him was sad and some were crying. "Fester," however, was clearly amused. What most found heart-wrenching, he found hilarious. That was the gag but is essentially "Fester" was seeing the film through his own lens. Another cartoon, artist unknown: A couple is looking at a modern art sculpture of a stylized human figure with a large hole in the middle. The caption was "That reminds me: Did you pack the sandwiches?" The gag is both about modern art and the feelings it evokes, but there's the question of what the sculptor intended to evoke and did he or she succeed. This isn't about blatant messaging: It's about conveying what the artist intends. A artist who intends to convey a sense of awe fails if most who see it giggle. So much of art is also based on shared experience to convey a message, such as the "theatre of the mind" aspect of humorous cartooning. If the person who sees the art has a different shared experience, the meaning can be lost. On some carved atlatl throwers from Europe there's an odd motif on the end that fits into the spear socket. Photos I've seen of it are stunning but no one knows what it means. It could have been a prehistoric joke, possibly with crude humor connotations or maybe even a visual pun, but no one in our era knows. What the carvers wished to convey has been lost because we aren't of the same culture. To be honest, much of art is and has been, what will sell. Douglas Adams penned in one of the [I]Hitchhiker[/I] books "If it means taking the money and run, I for one could use the exercise," and that's probably what goes on most of the time. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
Discussion and Debate
Discussion and Debate
The Kitchen Sink
What is the Philosophy of Art?
Top
Bottom