Quote:
|
IMO, our belief in words - or more precisely, the way in which we confuse language and experience - is the biggest problem we have as far as our thinking goes.
|
Words are a burden and a necessity. We define objects by their interaction with other objects. Definitions are necessary because they allow us to communicate our experiences and help expand the knowledge of others. They also allow us to test our model of the universe against other people’s models. So we must live with words until we can find a better way to share experience.
Quote:
|
I won't tell you what kind of art to appreciate, but neither will I let you tell me that Monet didn't make art
|
Well I suppose that I will tell you that
Monet did not make art. Now don’t real back at the statement just let me explain myself first. Suppose that you never knew of the word “art”. If you saw
The Seine at Argenteuil , you would describe it as a beautiful old exquisite painting. At the heart of it what you see is a paining. A paining is defined as a man-made composition made by applying paints to a surface. The other qualities such as exquisite, old and beautiful modify and sharpen the definition.
Now suppose that one would call that Monet a beautiful old exquisite painting and work of art. What did the term “art” reveal about the painting? Nothing, because art has no definition.
So when I happen to say that a Monet is not art, I am not contradicting myself by denying any property the painting might have because art does not describe any properties.
To give an example, lets create a word and not give it a definition. Let this word be “girb”. If I claim that a Monet has girb I would not be revealing any quality about the Monet. If I on the other hand say that a Picasso has no girb, I would not be denying any qualities that might exist.
So why does everybody use the word “art” to describe paintings, sculptures, music, writing, etc? Every one uses it, because every one else uses it. If enough people call something art, I suppose that it really does become art, but nobody knows why its art because art is not defined. Yet when one hears the whole world state that Monet is art it is pretty hard to deny the fact even though nobody knows what makes Monet art. So all that we know of art, is that it is a word yet it defines nothing in existance. Yet every one uses it as if it does. Strange, no?
Quote:
|
“The person(s) who feel it, it is real in most every sense of the word.”
|
If an emotional response is all that is necessary to define art then that is fine, but unfortunately it will qualify pretty much anything as art. For example: both a painting of a sunset and the sunset itself would qualify as art. Even mudane objects like a cup would become art. Go ahead try it, focus on any object before you, try to really understand and feel it and I guarantee you that you will get some form of emotional response. If this does become an accepted definition I will have no qualms with it, accept that I would have to re-write my argument above. Until that is happens though art remains a good example of an undefined word.
Cheers