 | | Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | (...) I certainly won't argue that point... at least not at this time. (...) but I would assert that there are at least two competing definitions of art: "art is in the eye of the beholder" "art is what the artist says is art" Under the first (...) (23 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —John Neal
|
| | | | | (...) This is a hot button issue for me, because I really dislike a definition of art to be "anything"-- it's useless IMO. (...) An artist can call the sky pink, but that doesn't make it so. More hot buttons:-) (...) I'd bet BPS wouldn't agree with (...) (23 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | (...) I disagree only because I don't see these as competing views! In my view, the artist is no more or less an observer than anyone else, when it comes to viewing/judging/interpreting the work. To that end, "art is what the artist says is art," (...) (23 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | Re: Canceled Lego Theme...? —Leonard Erlandson
|
| | | | (...) My favorite definition of art, as coined by Scott McCloud is: Art is that which is created not out of the basic need for survival. I like this definition because it is completely objective. I don't appreciate some art, but that doesn't mean (...) (23 years ago, 18-Apr-02, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
