Vincent von Frese 12 May 2013

Dan; The presentation part of the triad(conception, fabrication, presentation to the public) means art is communicative when and only when it gets presented and then seen by the public viewers including art professionals.

Value or worth of one's art might be self determined, I agree. But my point was presentation must be at least up to the quality level of the art if the public is asked to appreciate it's worth.

One can show great art all over the world but if there is no appreciation for it then the art is either not communicating or out of sync with the time it is presents...or just poor made and presented art. Does not mean it's not art though because van Gogh's work for example did not get much if any any public reception especially from the poor and uneducated folks among his social circle.

Vincent von Frese 13 Jun 2013

It looks like there is only one thing left to do.

And that is to break out the rubber noses and face paint because I sure feel like a clown!

Vincent von Frese 23 Jun 2013

Not a real clown of course , just one who performs art and with a smile without expecting anything in return.

Dan Ault 23 Jun 2013

Defining art and evaluating art art two separate things. A work that is created and presented as art, but is not appreciated or well received for any reason, does not change the fact that it is still a work of art.

Many people confuse the term "art" with descriptive adjectives, such as beautiful, precious, spiritual, etc.

Describing a sunset as a work of art is using the term metaphorically. A sunset is not a work of art. A beautiful woman is not a work of art. If I want to describe an aggressive man, I could say that he is a tiger. However, he really isn't.

Because many people have a confused sense of what a work of art is and believe the term to be synonymous with things of beauty or high quality, it is difficult for them to understand that there exists art that is unsuccessful, mediocre or just plain bad.

Vincent von Frese 11 Jul 2013

Dan; That makes good sense and you may have explained something of the ambiguity of the meaning of art very well indeed.

Art works have in the past been related to ultimate expressions, skill & craft as well as talent. I think these adjectives can assessed by the levels a person of art finds themselves in.It might be possible to assume that no one artist resides at the same revel as another in performance nor at the same time.

Vincent von Frese 14 Jul 2013

Dan brings up an interesting thought about the relationship of non-art elements in nature and those elements people have been presented with in the form of art. The beauty we all know in nature's energy can be reflected in art but equally can be reflected is the tragedy, violence and ugliness as in the writings of Poe. Painters and sculptors reflected the horror of war via German invasion of Holland for example....by producing sculpture showing twisted hearts and bodies.

See Ossip Zadkine's "The Destroyed City" sculpture reacting to the bombing of Rotterdam by the German Luftwaffe. Zadkine is a rare artist who's work is made for people, not for himself.

Reply