FA+
Shop
IS IT ART?
8 years ago
this topic's popped up again a couple times lately, so I'm just gonna put my blunt opinion on it.
- and for everyone out there who's all about the feels. Read to the end, there's a feel good message in it.
THE QUESTION IS NOT VALID.
- This question is primarily used as a tool of the pretentious to either justify their own works or shut down those they deem UNWORTHY of being called artists.
- It's just philosophical masturbation.
There's a TON of problems with the question itself, so it's hard to know where to start when structuring a rant on this. So I'll just kinda hit a couple at random.
a) the parameters of defining art are extremely ill defined
From a realistic pragmatic perspective - it's impossible to come up with a definition that's actionable. Especially one that rules in everything that IS and rules out everything that ISN'T.
b) your college professors brought this up (or likely someone on youtube)
"Some ideas are so stupid that only an academic would think they're smart." For those of you who are graduated, think back on everything your professors said that turned out to be total horseshit.
They'll bring up the sideways urinal because that's clearly art or some shit like that. When really they're just looking to get people talking without actually presenting a solution or get anything done.
c) story time: art that isn't art
My dad used to work for the Air Force as a civilian contractor from the 60s through the 2010s (omg, trigger warning military. freakin' close minded lib plebs). More specifically he worked on design reviews and business approvals for ICBM projects. An interesting note was that some of the pieces had to be polished out by hand because the machinery at the time weren't precise enough (if I remember it was the balance plates for the gyroscopes). He got to see the manufacture of these small metal disc plates, and these kind worker women would take their ultra-smooth cloth and gently polish around the metal disc. They seemed to know exactly how many turns and how much pressure to apply to get it within specifications ... and they were able to do it reliably no sweat.
In his words: "I don't care what you say, that's an art form."
So yeah, just THINK for a moment about every time someone has brought this junk question up. It's usually for one of the following intentions...
- They didn't like how someone was getting ill-gained attention, so they attack the person by saying IT'S NOT ART.
- They try to indirectly bolster their own practice. And oh good hell is that ever popular if you try to talk to an american cartoonist about japanese animation.
- They're just pompous windbags thinking that dialogue in itself is with merit. (oh, people are listening? IT MUST BE IMPORTANT)
of course, call someone out on this and they'll back down from their argument in an arrogant contradiction of logic because THEY DIDN'T MEAN IT LIKE THAT.
Any rate ... here's the foot note to all this.
THE REAL QUESTION IS: Is it art WORTH PAYING FOR?
...
This is an actionable question! And I'll bounce it back to the prior statements.
a) the parameters? It's a lot easier to define if it's worth paying for or not. This will really piss off artists because it means that SOME ART ISN'T WORTH PAYING FOR. And egads, that's a blow to the ego.
b) what about the windbags? It provides an actionable solution. So if a college professor is all "are video games art?" you can get a myriad of responses ... but if you say "Are video games art worth paying for" suddenly you have a much more clear answer and it becomes harder to justify pure arthouse wankery titles. And it'll shut down those frustrating case samples like the sideways urinal: "no, of course it's not worth thousands of dollars to buy a urinal installed sideways. Don't be stupid."
c) art that isn't art? That's everywhere. There's an art to giving painless flushots. There's an art to being able to balance the accounting books right the first time. There's an art in being able to orchestrate and guide other people to pull off a $200 million cinematic blockbuster that's just plain good. This is art that's worth paying for.
But hey. The people who bring up the question of "is it art" are completely innocent. They didn't mean to be a pretentious asshole by any measure! I'm sure there's a long winded explanation that isn't worth listening too! ... that or you got roped into the discussion without realizing it was a sham to begin with.
What I'm saying is that this question of "is it art" is total bunk.
What's more important is that you're able to produce something that's worthy of the pay you're receiving. Study your craft, be good at it, listen to your audience/customers. To me, that's a far better qualifier of "art" than anything I've heard in the ivory tower of academia or online discussions.
- and for everyone out there who's all about the feels. Read to the end, there's a feel good message in it.
THE QUESTION IS NOT VALID.
- This question is primarily used as a tool of the pretentious to either justify their own works or shut down those they deem UNWORTHY of being called artists.
- It's just philosophical masturbation.
There's a TON of problems with the question itself, so it's hard to know where to start when structuring a rant on this. So I'll just kinda hit a couple at random.
a) the parameters of defining art are extremely ill defined
From a realistic pragmatic perspective - it's impossible to come up with a definition that's actionable. Especially one that rules in everything that IS and rules out everything that ISN'T.
b) your college professors brought this up (or likely someone on youtube)
"Some ideas are so stupid that only an academic would think they're smart." For those of you who are graduated, think back on everything your professors said that turned out to be total horseshit.
They'll bring up the sideways urinal because that's clearly art or some shit like that. When really they're just looking to get people talking without actually presenting a solution or get anything done.
c) story time: art that isn't art
My dad used to work for the Air Force as a civilian contractor from the 60s through the 2010s (omg, trigger warning military. freakin' close minded lib plebs). More specifically he worked on design reviews and business approvals for ICBM projects. An interesting note was that some of the pieces had to be polished out by hand because the machinery at the time weren't precise enough (if I remember it was the balance plates for the gyroscopes). He got to see the manufacture of these small metal disc plates, and these kind worker women would take their ultra-smooth cloth and gently polish around the metal disc. They seemed to know exactly how many turns and how much pressure to apply to get it within specifications ... and they were able to do it reliably no sweat.
In his words: "I don't care what you say, that's an art form."
So yeah, just THINK for a moment about every time someone has brought this junk question up. It's usually for one of the following intentions...
- They didn't like how someone was getting ill-gained attention, so they attack the person by saying IT'S NOT ART.
- They try to indirectly bolster their own practice. And oh good hell is that ever popular if you try to talk to an american cartoonist about japanese animation.
- They're just pompous windbags thinking that dialogue in itself is with merit. (oh, people are listening? IT MUST BE IMPORTANT)
of course, call someone out on this and they'll back down from their argument in an arrogant contradiction of logic because THEY DIDN'T MEAN IT LIKE THAT.
Any rate ... here's the foot note to all this.
THE REAL QUESTION IS: Is it art WORTH PAYING FOR?
...
This is an actionable question! And I'll bounce it back to the prior statements.
a) the parameters? It's a lot easier to define if it's worth paying for or not. This will really piss off artists because it means that SOME ART ISN'T WORTH PAYING FOR. And egads, that's a blow to the ego.
b) what about the windbags? It provides an actionable solution. So if a college professor is all "are video games art?" you can get a myriad of responses ... but if you say "Are video games art worth paying for" suddenly you have a much more clear answer and it becomes harder to justify pure arthouse wankery titles. And it'll shut down those frustrating case samples like the sideways urinal: "no, of course it's not worth thousands of dollars to buy a urinal installed sideways. Don't be stupid."
c) art that isn't art? That's everywhere. There's an art to giving painless flushots. There's an art to being able to balance the accounting books right the first time. There's an art in being able to orchestrate and guide other people to pull off a $200 million cinematic blockbuster that's just plain good. This is art that's worth paying for.
But hey. The people who bring up the question of "is it art" are completely innocent. They didn't mean to be a pretentious asshole by any measure! I'm sure there's a long winded explanation that isn't worth listening too! ... that or you got roped into the discussion without realizing it was a sham to begin with.
What I'm saying is that this question of "is it art" is total bunk.
What's more important is that you're able to produce something that's worthy of the pay you're receiving. Study your craft, be good at it, listen to your audience/customers. To me, that's a far better qualifier of "art" than anything I've heard in the ivory tower of academia or online discussions.
Your alternate assessment question is a good one, which I wish was often modified to "Is it art worth paying for BY THE CANADIAN TAXPAYER?"
Because we've bought some real big ticket figurative and probably literal shit that's 'Art'.
I'm all for socializing art production but I'd like the artwork to clear the pretty low bar of "could be mistaken for garbage left behind after a party or a construction site." Cause we've got lots and lots of those dioramas installed around our highways already.
That's the 2nd half of what I was getting at, tbh. When you apply "is it art worth paying for" to the question of government grants - suddenly the high-arts community evaporates.
Hell, we might actually get that kickass Art Deco installation stuff again if people asked that question.