Quote:
Originally Posted by Anarky
So is a brand new math theory art? it takes a lot of creativity to create one.
|
I think art is something made with the intention of it being art, and in turn is viewed by the beholder to be art. There is also "art by consensus", or art that society or the art community is willing to label "art." Also, if the method used to derive said product is "artistic" (which I would contrast with a more "logical" means of conception.) Logic is utilitarian, it fulfills a purpose, it is created using a logical/scientific method. I think art made in this fashion tends to lose some of it's magic. Art is best when it's translated directly from one's soul to the next, with minimal "logic" or "method" involved
If art has any objective purpose or aim, it is to make an effect. No one makes art with the intent of it having no effect on someone.
I think math theory could or could not be art... Depending both on who conceived it/their intent behind it's conception/how they conceived it... as well as how it is perceived, and what sort of "impact" it could have on the observer. In some ways, I think science driven by some drives (say a "grand theory of everything", for example) strike me as very noble dream. A "dream" is somewhat artistic, I'd say. It sort of aspires for something. It's a bit more in the vein of essences/spirit/feeling than pure utilitarian logic is. So, it depends. A person could be driven by somewhat "lofty" or "artistic" means to come up with a novel scientific principle, and they could also potentially do so with relatively little established "method." This may not necessarily be called "art", but it's more synonymous, I'd say.
People often say something is "artistic" if it is put together very well, or grasps for some essence of feeling or spirit. Established method doesn't work so well with art. It tends to becomes generic and derived, unless the established structure/scheme offers plenty of room for creativity.
Note*: I don't claim to know, these are just some unstructed ramblings on the topic... Art is incredibly difficult to define. Ultimately it's going to depend on what the individual is prone to viewing as "art," to some degree. Art's power is entirely subjective. And so what qualifies something as "art" could be considered entirely subjective, as well. Really, "art" is one of the loftiest words/concepts we have. I find it can mean almost anything. For instance, there is often an "art" in every way of performing a certain action, even if the action itself may strike you as tedious. I'd say, generally, art is a subjective essence of "things" that is able to be communicated to others via some means/medium.
What is art?
Re: What is art?
Linear Mode
