Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post

roachboy · 05-13-2010, 08:51 AM

well, i don't see there is a general philosophical notion of what art is or does. there's lots of possibilities. personally, i like john cage's definition:

art is imitation of nature in her mode of operation.

but it's the last part that's the key---in her mode of operation---that's why i use terms like environment or space rather than piece alot of the time. art is a kind of recursive environment that is open the emergence(s)...meanings are emergent phenomena, so effects of interactions between embodied agents and environment (with no clear boundaries separating them)...this is why it's kinda important for me conceptually to not determine in advance what a piece "means" but rather to think about a piece as a set of parameters that move in particular directions (and not others, by extension)....

i'm kinda interested in tampering with the limits of "normal" experience as a political matter and i'm interested in other work that i take as doing similar or parallel things in different media, along different paths often for quite different ends.

so for me, the art that i prefer to interact with provides a basis for learning more of what's possible or for opening up other possibilities. can come from any number of periods and in any number of media.

like everything else, it moves around.

but this is about my preferences, yes? not some ontological discussion of what art is.

o yeah: i learn a whole lot about "art" from listening to the salt marsh in the morning. more than i learn from looking at most art objects.

05-13-2010, 08:51 AM	#28 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	well, i don't see there is a general philosophical notion of what art is or does. there's lots of possibilities. personally, i like john cage's definition: art is imitation of nature in her mode of operation. but it's the last part that's the key---in her mode of operation---that's why i use terms like environment or space rather than piece alot of the time. art is a kind of recursive environment that is open the emergence(s)...meanings are emergent phenomena, so effects of interactions between embodied agents and environment (with no clear boundaries separating them)...this is why it's kinda important for me conceptually to not determine in advance what a piece "means" but rather to think about a piece as a set of parameters that move in particular directions (and not others, by extension).... i'm kinda interested in tampering with the limits of "normal" experience as a political matter and i'm interested in other work that i take as doing similar or parallel things in different media, along different paths often for quite different ends. so for me, the art that i prefer to interact with provides a basis for learning more of what's possible or for opening up other possibilities. can come from any number of periods and in any number of media. like everything else, it moves around. but this is about my preferences, yes? not some ontological discussion of what art is. o yeah: i learn a whole lot about "art" from listening to the salt marsh in the morning. more than i learn from looking at most art objects. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite Last edited by roachboy; 05-13-2010 at 08:54 AM..