Page 1 of 4 [ 52 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,440
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

30 Dec 2014, 12:08 am

Fnord wrote:
ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
Fnord wrote:
The arts are "appallingly undervalued" because they are in a rut. Everything is either derivative of something else, or a vain attempt to produce "art" by smashing pieces of junk together, putting a frame around it, and slapping an emo label on the entire mess.
That's not the point. It's not about the money. It's about the personal experience the individual has as creator.
Who said anything about money? I'm referring to the intrinsic social value of what passes for "art" these days. It all seems to have dropped to the level of rambling emo free-verse - an expression of nothing particularly significant to anyone but the "artist".


I've heard plenty of recent music I would not categorize as 'emo free-verse', of course most of what reaches the radio...well eww. But of course that is just music not all art.


_________________
We won't go back.


aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,563

30 Dec 2014, 12:25 am

Hmm/Ahem.. in the REAL WORLD ART IN GENERAL PER ALL THAT MEANS, is much more venerated in the general population than science is, per labels as they exist now, in the overall, westernized world.

Science means making a living to some folks, and a special interest in niches here and there, including here, but as far as having fun, a big Ha! HA! on that for anyone who observes herds of human beings.

Just try striking up a conversation about science with someone in the REAL WORLD, PER ANYONE, and see how far that gets one in reciprocal social communication. And no, I like to talk science in the real world, at times, so I am not suggesting that is a good thing, but hell yes, it most definitely SEEMS TO BE reality in the big herd out THERE, HUH.

NASA and math equations is NO COMPETITION FOR DANCING with the STARS, and while I'm not one for structured, lessoned, graded and judged art in the eyes of so-called WESTERNIZED judges of art, it is art, never the less, per general label with a 'nasty tinge of science', still to me, per all that art can be.

I LIKE separation of church and state AND I like to keep art and science separate, too, but in the western world as in most things, structure counts more than substance, in my opinion.

Whenever someone tells me OH your dance, your martial arts, and your poetry is so cool, where and WHO did you learn to do that, RESPECTIVELY, at and from, AND THEN I question (to myself of course) if they even ever have truly experienced 'non-adulterated' NON-SYSTEMIZING art.

Anything that requires lessons or rules is a science project to me but unadulterated creativity is my most favorite friend.

So yeah, maybe the question is, does anyone even know what art is in the westernized world, per view of what art even MEANS.

And how long has it been this way.

Answer:

The Victorian era, is one answer, and there are many more fundamentalist leaning so-called artists associated with that.

The original style of poetry is free verse, until Whitman brings it back to life. So yeah, the resurrection of TRULY ARTFUL POETRY COMES AGAIN, with him.

Fundamentalist leaning folks are just that, whether it is in religion, ART, or science. Folks who follow fundamentals can be viewed as fundamentalists and truly fundamentals are science too, overall, at least, per systemizing, in the general definition of science that Dictionary dot com speaks to, as well. :)

NAH, IT'S MARTIAL ARTS AND NOT MARTIAL SCIENCE, for anyone who asks me who is my master as my teacher.

IN all these arts my master and teacher is GOD aka Mother Nature true per my own unique innate and instinctual human nature too, as GOD helps me make the art as one unique force as 'WE' GO IN NOW AS ONE truly creative FORCE OF NOW. :)


_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick


Fnord
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 May 2008
Age: 66
Gender: Male
Posts: 59,750
Location: Stendec

30 Dec 2014, 2:48 am

Sweetleaf wrote:
Fnord wrote:
ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
Fnord wrote:
The arts are "appallingly undervalued" because they are in a rut. Everything is either derivative of something else, or a vain attempt to produce "art" by smashing pieces of junk together, putting a frame around it, and slapping an emo label on the entire mess.
That's not the point. It's not about the money. It's about the personal experience the individual has as creator.
Who said anything about money? I'm referring to the intrinsic social value of what passes for "art" these days. It all seems to have dropped to the level of rambling emo free-verse - an expression of nothing particularly significant to anyone but the "artist".
I've heard plenty of recent music I would not categorize as 'emo free-verse', of course most of what reaches the radio...well eww. But of course that is just music not all art.
I call this one "Cetacean's Lament":

Image


Of course, the original photographer, whose name is illegible, calls it "Photo of Electronic Waste" - (c) 2006.


_________________
 
No love for Hamas, Hezbollah, Iranian Leadership, Islamic Jihad, other Islamic terrorist groups, OR their supporters and sympathizers.


aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,563

30 Dec 2014, 3:17 am

^^^

Nah, if it is up to me, I call it Landscape of the Modern Culture Brain. :)

And overall, yes, that's a work of science so it cannot really be beautiful innately itself which the artist does a fine job of expressing, in this case. :)


_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick


eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

30 Dec 2014, 3:28 am

Persimmonpudding wrote:
The arts are necessary for making anything at all happen, for better or for worse.


I don't follow the logic (or lack thereof) at all.



eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

30 Dec 2014, 3:35 am

ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
Fnord wrote:
The arts are "appallingly undervalued" because they are in a rut. Everything is either derivative of something else, or a vain attempt to produce "art" by smashing pieces of junk together, putting a frame around it, and slapping an emo label on the entire mess.



That's not the point. It's not about the money. It's about the personal experience the individual has as creator.


I don't think so. When I look at a piece of art, I could care less about the personal experience of the artist. What I do care is how the art affects me, not you, not the artist, not anyone else. If it doesn't affect me positively, then I don't care for it.

I don't even care to know anything about the life of the artist. It makes no difference to me if he was a drug addict, a neurotic, a psychopath, an alcoholic, poor, rich, ... . The only thing that matters is how I feel about the piece of art in question.

If the other things mattered at all, then I would be subjecting myself to someone else's judgement, not mine and that is unacceptable. That is nothing more than groupthink where the individual does not matter. If you don't like a piece of art, it doesn't matter if everyone else in the world loves it. All that is important is your appreciation for it.

If an artist wants me to appreciate his work, then he needs to do work that appeals to me. Nothing else matters.



aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,563

30 Dec 2014, 3:42 am

eric76 wrote:
Persimmonpudding wrote:
The arts are necessary for making anything at all happen, for better or for worse.


I don't follow the logic (or lack thereof) at all.


Science now shows that human emotion is the source of almost all rational decisions before they are even made.

Folks who have that part of their brain damaged cannot even make a decision as simple as what color socks to wear when faced with more than one choice.

And human emotion is often the source of inspiration for art and art is also often the source to inspire human emotion.

So IF one wants to increase executive cognitive functioning as a whole, focus on art, but not the structured guideline type of art, instead, the type of art that the ice princess in Frozen did per let it go and just flow IT. :)

And emotion also cements human short term working memory, so yeah even short order cooks could learn something better with full regulation of emotions.

And yes, again, as I've mentioned quite a bit on this website lately, the practice of human physical intelligence through the ART OF MOVEMENT can better regulate human emotions and sensory integration.

A MIND AND BODY IN BALANCE IS TRULY A WORK OF ART UNTO ITSELF.

AND YES, ART2, IS WHAT god IS OVERALL, AS TAPESTRY OF THE GREATEST WORK OF ART THERE IS from inside to outside to above so below in total tapestry of beauty. :)


_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick


Sweetleaf
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 6 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 34,440
Location: Somewhere in Colorado

30 Dec 2014, 3:42 am

Fnord wrote:
Sweetleaf wrote:
Fnord wrote:
ooOoOoOAnaOoOoOoo wrote:
Fnord wrote:
The arts are "appallingly undervalued" because they are in a rut. Everything is either derivative of something else, or a vain attempt to produce "art" by smashing pieces of junk together, putting a frame around it, and slapping an emo label on the entire mess.
That's not the point. It's not about the money. It's about the personal experience the individual has as creator.
Who said anything about money? I'm referring to the intrinsic social value of what passes for "art" these days. It all seems to have dropped to the level of rambling emo free-verse - an expression of nothing particularly significant to anyone but the "artist".
I've heard plenty of recent music I would not categorize as 'emo free-verse', of course most of what reaches the radio...well eww. But of course that is just music not all art.
I call this one "Cetacean's Lament":

Image


Of course, the original photographer, whose name is illegible, calls it "Photo of Electronic Waste" - (c) 2006.


Well what are people opposed to a sunset over the mountains or something like that?


_________________
We won't go back.


eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

30 Dec 2014, 4:01 am

aghogday wrote:
eric76 wrote:
Persimmonpudding wrote:
The arts are necessary for making anything at all happen, for better or for worse.


I don't follow the logic (or lack thereof) at all.


Science now shows that human emotion is the source of almost all rational decisions before they are even made.

Folks who have that part of their brain damaged cannot even make a decision as simple as what color socks to wear when faced with more than one choice.

And human emotion is often the source of inspiration for art and art is also often the source to inspire human emotion.

So IF one wants to increase executive cognitive functioning as a whole, focus on art, but not the structured guideline type of art, instead, the type of art that the ice princess in Frozen did per let it go and just flow IT. :)

And emotion also cements human short term working memory, so yeah even short order cooks could learn something better with full regulation of emotions.

And yes, again, as I've mentioned quite a bit on this website lately, the practice of human physical intelligence through the ART OF MOVEMENT can better regulate human emotions and sensory integration.

A MIND AND BODY IN BALANCE IS TRULY A WORK OF ART UNTO ITSELF.

AND YES, ART2, IS WHAT god IS OVERALL, AS TAPESTRY OF THE GREATEST WORK OF ART THERE IS from inside to outside to above so below in total tapestry of beauty. :)


So art is the result of emotion. So is rational decisions. Therefore art is responsible for everything?

I must have something wrong. It looks to me like a casual relationship, not a causal relationship.



Inventor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,014
Location: New Orleans

30 Dec 2014, 7:52 am

aghogday wrote:
eric76 wrote:
Persimmonpudding wrote:
The arts are necessary for making anything at all happen, for better or for worse.


I don't follow the logic (or lack thereof) at all.


Science now shows that human emotion is the source of almost all rational decisions before they are even made.

Folks who have that part of their brain damaged cannot even make a decision as simple as what color socks to wear when faced with more than one choice.

And human emotion is often the source of inspiration for art and art is also often the source to inspire human emotion.

So IF one wants to increase executive cognitive functioning as a whole, focus on art, but not the structured guideline type of art, instead, the type of art that the ice princess in Frozen did per let it go and just flow IT. :)

And emotion also cements human short term working memory, so yeah even short order cooks could learn something better with full regulation of emotions.

And yes, again, as I've mentioned quite a bit on this website lately, the practice of human physical intelligence through the ART OF MOVEMENT can better regulate human emotions and sensory integration.

A MIND AND BODY IN BALANCE IS TRULY A WORK OF ART UNTO ITSELF.

AND YES, ART2, IS WHAT god IS OVERALL, AS TAPESTRY OF THE GREATEST WORK OF ART THERE IS from inside to outside to above so below in total tapestry of beauty. :)


Science and Art have been around a long time. Mostly they traveled together. The oldest artifacts were built for function, the mechanical and technological, but then like the oldest spear throwers, had animals engraved on them, or their outline suggested a shape, and that part was carved as a bird.

Which came first? I have never built anything without drawing a picture or several first. My Machine Shop does not deal in words. Drawings and models transfer the idea from one mind to another.

Science says a boat is a box to keep out water. It is true, others can do the same, but a hull design is how it moves over the uneven and ever changing surface of water.

Two things happen, making it most suitable for use, and a thing of beauty.

Science is spinning thread, making a loom, and weaving cloth. Somehow we know of six weaves from 35,000 years ago, including herringbone tweed.

Sometimes it is art that drives technology. From 80,000 years ago a crane leg bone was opened on one end, had a mouth piece, and five finger holes. This flute still plays. It is neanderthal.

Art for arts sake, cave paintings, were billboard size, the stone was first cleaned, sized with plant sap, from a scaffold built as much as five miles underground, to paint a ceiling twenty-five foot up. Then the image laid out, and painted with many pigments prepared by burning and crushing stone, grinding it to a powder, mixing with hot plant sap, and building up the image in layers. Gallons of paints were used. The stones for pigment came from far away. The works took a year or more to produce.

Also from the cave paintings we know of tents, dyed in bright colors, that glowed from within.

From graves we know they dressed well, had style, a sense of what works and looks good.

Art seems to be the driving force that then used functional Science to reach the envisioned goal.

Even when the goal exists, I am building a web site, with a pencil, lots of drawings that then get inked and colored, that may get redone as digital, use several pictures per second, and produce something else.

No two people weave the same blanket. Art transfers ideas into other minds like nothing else. Words fail, and science without art is generally ugly. Compare The Golden Age of Greece, buildings, pottery, theater, with the Romans, who built as engineers, and made massive ugly.

In 1500 Italy came back with realism in art, showing things as they were seen, and many minds opened up to higher art. The ceiling of the Cistein Chapel had work as intense as the old cave paintings.

Music became complex and intense, then the age of science starts.

Art seems to provide the mental focus for higher thought.

The arts of our era do not, we are like Roman Ugly. Like the Romans, we got GI Joe, and Hulk Hogan.

We do not produce work that leaves you wordless, staring, open mouthed.

Art, Music, Dance, are the path to a higher vibe.



Janissy
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 5 May 2009
Age: 57
Gender: Female
Posts: 6,450
Location: x

30 Dec 2014, 8:09 am

I think art has been democratized by technology to the extent that most of it is never seen by the art establishment and so doesn't get an official 'art' label. But it is appreciated far and wide. Now and then the art establishment will creakily swivel its ancient head and notice somebody like Banksy, but most of it flies under their radar.

The confounder is that non-art is produced in greater quantities and using the same formats as art so it gets camouflaged by all it is surrounded by. But it is there. And it is appreciated.

example




aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,563

30 Dec 2014, 8:19 am

Inventor wrote:
aghogday wrote:
eric76 wrote:
Persimmonpudding wrote:
The arts are necessary for making anything at all happen, for better or for worse.


I don't follow the logic (or lack thereof) at all.


Science now shows that human emotion is the source of almost all rational decisions before they are even made.

Folks who have that part of their brain damaged cannot even make a decision as simple as what color socks to wear when faced with more than one choice.

And human emotion is often the source of inspiration for art and art is also often the source to inspire human emotion.

So IF one wants to increase executive cognitive functioning as a whole, focus on art, but not the structured guideline type of art, instead, the type of art that the ice princess in Frozen did per let it go and just flow IT. :)

And emotion also cements human short term working memory, so yeah even short order cooks could learn something better with full regulation of emotions.

And yes, again, as I've mentioned quite a bit on this website lately, the practice of human physical intelligence through the ART OF MOVEMENT can better regulate human emotions and sensory integration.

A MIND AND BODY IN BALANCE IS TRULY A WORK OF ART UNTO ITSELF.

AND YES, ART2, IS WHAT god IS OVERALL, AS TAPESTRY OF THE GREATEST WORK OF ART THERE IS from inside to outside to above so below in total tapestry of beauty. :)


Science and Art have been around a long time. Mostly they traveled together. The oldest artifacts were built for function, the mechanical and technological, but then like the oldest spear throwers, had animals engraved on them, or their outline suggested a shape, and that part was carved as a bird.

Which came first? I have never built anything without drawing a picture or several first. My Machine Shop does not deal in words. Drawings and models transfer the idea from one mind to another.

Science says a boat is a box to keep out water. It is true, others can do the same, but a hull design is how it moves over the uneven and ever changing surface of water.

Two things happen, making it most suitable for use, and a thing of beauty.

Science is spinning thread, making a loom, and weaving cloth. Somehow we know of six weaves from 35,000 years ago, including herringbone tweed.

Sometimes it is art that drives technology. From 80,000 years ago a crane leg bone was opened on one end, had a mouth piece, and five finger holes. This flute still plays. It is neanderthal.

Art for arts sake, cave paintings, were billboard size, the stone was first cleaned, sized with plant sap, from a scaffold built as much as five miles underground, to paint a ceiling twenty-five foot up. Then the image laid out, and painted with many pigments prepared by burning and crushing stone, grinding it to a powder, mixing with hot plant sap, and building up the image in layers. Gallons of paints were used. The stones for pigment came from far away. The works took a year or more to produce.

Also from the cave paintings we know of tents, dyed in bright colors, that glowed from within.

From graves we know they dressed well, had style, a sense of what works and looks good.

Art seems to be the driving force that then used functional Science to reach the envisioned goal.

Even when the goal exists, I am building a web site, with a pencil, lots of drawings that then get inked and colored, that may get redone as digital, use several pictures per second, and produce something else.

No two people weave the same blanket. Art transfers ideas into other minds like nothing else. Words fail, and science without art is generally ugly. Compare The Golden Age of Greece, buildings, pottery, theater, with the Romans, who built as engineers, and made massive ugly.

In 1500 Italy came back with realism in art, showing things as they were seen, and many minds opened up to higher art. The ceiling of the Cistein Chapel had work as intense as the old cave paintings.

Music became complex and intense, then the age of science starts.

Art seems to provide the mental focus for higher thought.

The arts of our era do not, we are like Roman Ugly. Like the Romans, we got GI Joe, and Hulk Hogan.

We do not produce work that leaves you wordless, staring, open mouthed.

Art, Music, Dance, are the path to a higher vibe.


Amen.. He who has no art has no Heart.. And quoted for what rings true at the highest of genius achievement..and fuller human intelligence..:)!


_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick


aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,563

30 Dec 2014, 8:31 am

First there was dark.. Then light.. Then the dance of movement generating the sound of music inspiring the dance once again.. So yes.. Art is in the origin of ALL existence as we know it...

Some folks continue to just do it in singing the dance of life...

Others ask why...

Truly intelligent folks do both in balance...


_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick


aghogday
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 25 Nov 2010
Age: 63
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,563

30 Dec 2014, 8:47 am

Janissy wrote:
I think art has been democratized by technology to the extent that most of it is never seen by the art establishment and so doesn't get an official 'art' label. But it is appreciated far and wide. Now and then the art establishment will creakily swivel its ancient head and notice somebody like Banksy, but most of it flies under their radar.

The confounder is that non-art is produced in greater quantities and using the same formats as art so it gets camouflaged by all it is surrounded by. But it is there. And it is appreciated.

example




In my opinion art that must have directing is still science and rather boring to me.. as it is predictable.. but true some folks are not as open to novelty as others so if the brush must be led by others to meet the strokes of others.. So be it a hybrid of art and science...


_________________
KATiE MiA FredericK!iI

Gravatar is one of the coolest things ever!! !

http://en.gravatar.com/katiemiafrederick


btbnnyr
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 18 May 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 7,359
Location: Lost Angleles Carmen Santiago

30 Dec 2014, 4:40 pm

I love pursuit of science and pursuit of art, both are wonderful eggsperiences to me.
Due to lack of time, I can pursue only one of these deeply, and I chose science, which is as creative as art.
Also, I love science more at the feeling level, it has always felt better to me to figure something out and make objects work in some new way than making art, which feels good too, but does not rival the feeling of science, which is probably the biggest reason I chose science over art, but if I had more lives, I would want to be a ballet dancer in one of them, as the feeling of movement in dance is the only feeling in art that sometimes rivals the feeling of science, but after my ballet career is over, I will have to become a scientist again.
I don't think I venerate either science or art, I'm not sure what it means to venerate something.


_________________
Drain and plane and grain and blain your brain, and then again,
Propane and butane out of the gas main, your blain shall sustain!


eric76
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Aug 2012
Gender: Male
Posts: 10,660
Location: In the heart of the dust bowl

30 Dec 2014, 6:05 pm

Feynman came up with a really interesting observation regarding the differences between the artist and the scientist. It's been many years since I read it and I don't remember the particular details, but I'll try to give an equivalent example.

When the scientist and the artist see a rose, they basically see the same thing superficially. Things like color and outward structure. But the scientist sees far more because of his knowledge and understanding of the science. In addition to the superficial features of the rose, he also can appreciate the cellular structure and evolutionary processes, the genetics of the rose, and so on. It isn't the scientist who is at a loss in appreciating the rose -- it is the artist.