Subject:
|
Re: defining art (was "Swearing?")
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Fri, 7 Jan 2000 16:56:14 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2268 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, John Neal writes:
> > i'm in total agreement with you that "everything/ anything can be/ is art"
> > is a falsehood. it is a greedy manipulation of art's inherent subjective
> > nature, and idicative of the ignorance and moral decay present in modern
> > society. (i blame warhol-ism for propogating this ideaology, btw)
>
> Ah, this is an excellent point here. Everything isn't art, but those whose • morals are flawed
> will deem certain works which I would consider obscenities. Still it's a very • subjective
> definition, and nothing new to this discussion but it has been a very helpful • insight to me.
> Another person earlier said that what one determines as art says more about • that person than
> about the art itself, which I also can see.
Everything isn't art, but those *you deem* to have flawed morals will accept
certain works you consider obscenities.
See the difference? You make the assumption in your statement that your
opinion on morals is the correct and only one.
> My frustrations with what the world today calls art is related I guess to the • frustrations I
> feel towards the moral plight of our society right now.
>
> My last hope at some objective qualification would teeter on the notion that a • morally prefect
> person's idea of what art is would be an absolute definition. Any other • assertions would be
> incorrect due to the flawed nature of the viewer. This doesn't get us any • closer to an answer,
> but it helps me anyway.
What a morally perfect person actually is is going to vary from one person to
the next. You are trying to base an absolute on a subjective judgement.
Further, I'm not sure that it is anyone's interest in having a moral censor
deciding what is and isn't art. Nor should what is and isn't art simply be a
morals issue.
Bruce
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: defining art (was "Swearing?")
|
| <387579FF.F0AA7C07@uswest.net> <FnyJnI.5L8@lugnet.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; x-mac-type="54455854"; x-mac-creator="4D4F5353" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit craig hamilton wrote: <snip> (...) Ah, this is an excellent point (...) (25 years ago, 7-Jan-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
473 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
