The Trump fan-comprised "MAGA 8 Band" gave a truly unforgettable performance to warm up the crowd for Trump's rally — an a capella performance to boot!
In my opinion, art is when a person is inspired by … ”emotion” seems to weak and vague. “Passion” is closer, but some art is subtler and gentler than that word evokes.
That feeling could be humor, or awe. It could be hate, love, worship, derision, even focus or determination. They take that feeling and use it as inspiration to intentionally create.
Creation. Inspiration. I think art is when these two elements fuze.
I know you get some weird situations because of that definition, but I still like it.
Poorly drawing a dick on a napkin to make your depressed friend smile is more art than a world class painter perfectly, yet passionlessly, duplicating a priceless masterpiece for a scam.
A designer spending four extra hours in CAD because that small section of the chair just isn’t right is creating art. The assembly line recreating that exact chair for sell isn’t.
What is good art is extremely subjective. In my opinion, it’s art that takes a great deal of skill, effort, or an ingenuous innovation. It’s art that the passion of the artist demands you listen, or art that inspires an intense passion in the consumer of it. If it has a goal of inspiring a reaction, and it inspires that exact reaction.
Bad art is lazy, or boring. It derives its substance entirely from prior art with no innovation or originality. If it has a goal reaction, it fails to elicit it. It can be low skill or low effort. If its designed to bully or punch down, it is in my opinion “bad art”.
I enjoyed your TED talk, but I think I respectfully disagree. Good art is the art that meets where you’re at to receive it, and bad art is either too above or too below where you’re at. It’s not about quality, time, or passion, imo. It’s surprise and thought blended for the receiver.
For example, if I love a certain type of home, let’s say a home designed by a current architect in the Mid-Century Modern style. It’s influenced and derivative, but it has all of the modern conveniences and it’s a surprise to me because I love the current style of it, not the original Farnsworth Home because I don’t even know about that home. I’m thrilled with the home design, floor plan and the way my family can live in it. A reviewer would shit on this home because it’s derivative, a bit cheaply made and over done by now. I would think it’s art because I love it, but the reviewer would think it’s shit. Who’s right? I think it’s both of us.
I want to hear them!
Eh, why not.
In my opinion, art is when a person is inspired by … ”emotion” seems to weak and vague. “Passion” is closer, but some art is subtler and gentler than that word evokes.
That feeling could be humor, or awe. It could be hate, love, worship, derision, even focus or determination. They take that feeling and use it as inspiration to intentionally create.
Creation. Inspiration. I think art is when these two elements fuze.
I know you get some weird situations because of that definition, but I still like it.
Poorly drawing a dick on a napkin to make your depressed friend smile is more art than a world class painter perfectly, yet passionlessly, duplicating a priceless masterpiece for a scam.
A designer spending four extra hours in CAD because that small section of the chair just isn’t right is creating art. The assembly line recreating that exact chair for sell isn’t.
What is good art is extremely subjective. In my opinion, it’s art that takes a great deal of skill, effort, or an ingenuous innovation. It’s art that the passion of the artist demands you listen, or art that inspires an intense passion in the consumer of it. If it has a goal of inspiring a reaction, and it inspires that exact reaction.
Bad art is lazy, or boring. It derives its substance entirely from prior art with no innovation or originality. If it has a goal reaction, it fails to elicit it. It can be low skill or low effort. If its designed to bully or punch down, it is in my opinion “bad art”.
Thank you for coming to my TED Talk.
I enjoyed your TED talk, but I think I respectfully disagree. Good art is the art that meets where you’re at to receive it, and bad art is either too above or too below where you’re at. It’s not about quality, time, or passion, imo. It’s surprise and thought blended for the receiver.
For example, if I love a certain type of home, let’s say a home designed by a current architect in the Mid-Century Modern style. It’s influenced and derivative, but it has all of the modern conveniences and it’s a surprise to me because I love the current style of it, not the original Farnsworth Home because I don’t even know about that home. I’m thrilled with the home design, floor plan and the way my family can live in it. A reviewer would shit on this home because it’s derivative, a bit cheaply made and over done by now. I would think it’s art because I love it, but the reviewer would think it’s shit. Who’s right? I think it’s both of us.
Thank you for your reply. I’ll have to think about it.