You're opinion about art being alive...

[Basch1990]

in all honesty i find that most people think art is just a game or its just a piece of paper... in all honesty i would like to see your view... in all honesty i think any type of art is alive because when its made an artist puts a piece of their soul into it... after its complete its like it becomes a child to be nurtured and loved as it lives on through the ages

please give reasons why...


P.S. idk where this is supposed to go so if its in the wrong area i hope it can be moved

 

[Lirael]

I'm not sure whether I'd term it as alive/dead, but I do feel art, music and creative works connect us to the person who made them and furthermore to the people who've experienced it, cherished it, thought about it, written about it, etc. Art - in which I encompass paintings/drawings, drama, writing, music, film, photography - is a mode of expression and it is part of what makes life so fulfilling, part of what makes us human.

You can certainly attach a personality to a piece and/or collection of art. When we read a book, see a painting, hear a piece of music, watch a film, we can't possibly think or feel exactly what the creator thought and felt. We can't be certain that our perception of the creator is true, either - but we can get a feeling about them in the same way we use our intuition to detect how those who live around us feel.

 

[Basch1990]

I'm not sure whether I'd term it as alive/dead, but I do feel art, music and creative works connect us to the person who made them and furthermore to the people who've experienced it, cherished it, thought about it, written about it, etc. Art - in which I encompass paintings/drawings, drama, writing, music, film, photography - is a mode of expression and it is part of what makes life so fulfilling, part of what makes us human.

You can certainly attach a personality to a piece and/or collection of art. When we read a book, see a painting, hear a piece of music, watch a film, we can't possibly think or feel exactly what the creator thought and felt. We can't be certain that our perception of the creator is true, either - but we can get a feeling about them in the same way we use our intuition to detect how those who live around us feel.

you know i think i like you answer most

 

[Dionysos]

This could spawn some debate, so I’ll move it to The Sleeping Forest for now. Here it might get drowned by news threads and the like.


- Thread Moved -

I’d agree about some art being alive in a sense, though not in a Pygmalion way. It would be horrifying if some of the art that is out there was ever granted life. Muscular human corpses and unmade beds would roam the streets.

Art is (along with talking and writing, which may be a class of art in some forms) a way in which humans can express themselves to each other. People put thought and care into art, and when we find art we are presented with an interesting chance to look into that.

Some art can capture an essence of the culture of beliefs of the time, or beliefs of a previous time. Some art reflects dreams. Some art can reflect the individual person who made the art, and can be interesting as it has an individual character to it. Art is very varied and can take just about any shape.

I love a lot of art from all ages. Starting with prehistoric cave paintings, through to the late Bronze Age, up through antiquity, the renaissance, and ending up in the 19th-20th Century. I’m not as keen on modern-modern art, but there are still modern art pieces that can be interesting. I can’t paint all modern art with the same brush at all (to use a very predictable saying).

I don’t really ‘follow’ art as such. I’m not keen on keeping up with what people do these days in the art world. My interest lies in the art of the past. I also am not as keen on the art of bananas and other common objects of today. I see the benefit in it, and it will be of great value to the future, but currently I don’t need to look at bananas very often. I can appreciate the skill of the artist, but not the subject, unless done in an interesting way. A painting of Heracles defending Hesione from the Monster of Troy would be more to my style. You don’t see that at the grocery stores.

I’m not keen on modernist art when it is essentially a spork resting neatly on a sausage. While not all ancient art and sculpture is great in terms of artistic talent (the grotesque and exaggerated prehistoric ‘Venus’ figures, etc), there are some objects that are interesting and impressive because they are so old, and because it has been made by an individual far removed from today, even putting aside the cultic elements associated with some of them which give them another level. There is something very innocent, childlike and curious about some of it. Since today we all could buy a sausage and place a spork on top of it, I don’t see it as art in the same way. I also doubt it will survive to fascinate future generations. That said, if it is alive to some people, then it is alive to them. While that sort of thing does nothing for me, it may to someone else.

With art I suppose two different things are happening which can give it life, like Lirael said. You look at it and have your own interpretations, emotional responses, etc. On top of this you may know what / have an idea of what the artist was intending to convey with the piece, you might know about the life or environment of the artist (even if you don’t know much) and try and put it into context. In other words, we give art life by thinking about the art and imagining it alive, in a sense.

Art may be cold and lifeless to animals and the natural world, but our imaginations become the ichor which pumps art into life, and through this it can achieve a timeless immortality.

 

[Basch1990]

This could spawn some debate, so I’ll move it to The Sleeping Forest for now. Here it might get drowned by news threads and the like.


- Thread Moved -

I’d agree about some art being alive in a sense, though not in a Pygmalion way. It would be horrifying if some of the art that is out there was ever granted life. Muscular human corpses and unmade beds would roam the streets.

Art is (along with talking and writing, which may be a class of art in some forms) a way in which humans can express themselves to each other. People put thought and care into art, and when we find art we are presented with an interesting chance to look into that.

Some art can capture an essence of the culture of beliefs of the time, or beliefs of a previous time. Some art reflects dreams. Some art can reflect the individual person who made the art, and can be interesting as it has an individual character to it. Art is very varied and can take just about any shape.

I love a lot of art from all ages. Starting with prehistoric cave paintings, through to the late Bronze Age, up through antiquity, the renaissance, and ending up in the 19th-20th Century. I’m not as keen on modern-modern art, but there are still modern art pieces that can be interesting. I can’t paint all modern art with the same brush at all (to use a very predictable saying).

I don’t really ‘follow’ art as such. I’m not keen on keeping up with what people do these days in the art world. My interest lies in the art of the past. I also am not as keen on the art of bananas and other common abstract objects of today. I see the benefit in it, and it will be of great value to the future, but currently I don’t need to look at bananas very often. I can appreciate the skill of the artist, but not the subject, unless done in an interesting way. A painting of Heracles defending Hesione from the Monster of Troy would be more to my style. You don’t see that at the grocery stores.

I’m not keen on modernist art when it is essentially a spork resting neatly on a sausage. While not all ancient art and sculpture is great in terms of artistic talent (the grotesque and exaggerated prehistoric ‘Venus’ figures, etc), there are some objects that are interesting and impressive because they are so old, and because it has been made by an individual far removed from today, even putting aside the cultic elements associated with some of them which give them another level. There is something very innocent, childlike and curious about some of it. Since today we all could buy a sausage and place a spork on top of it, I don’t see it as art in the same way. I also doubt it will survive to fascinate future generations. That said, if it is alive to some people, then it is alive to them. While that sort of thing does nothing for me, it may to someone else.

With art I suppose two different things are happening which can give it life, like Lirael said. You look at it and have your own interpretations, emotional responses, etc. On top of this you may know what / have an idea of what the artist was intending to convey with the piece, you might know about the life or environment of the artist (even if you don’t know much) and try and put it into context. In other words, we give art life by thinking about the art and imagining it alive, in a sense.

Art may be cold and lifeless to animals and the natural world, but our imaginations become the ichor which pumps art into life, and through this it can achieve a timeless immortality.

thank you for moving it...

and what would your take on video games... would you see it as just something lifeless or would you actually see the characters with a type of living soul??? i mean games like say the original FF games had a kind of lifelessness to it but you could kinda feel like the chars were a live in there right??? i mean i dont wanna be alone in this it would make me feel kinda weird

 

[Lirael]

thank you for moving it...

and what would your take on video games... would you see it as just something lifeless or would you actually see the characters with a type of living soul??? i mean games like say the original FF games had a kind of lifelessness to it but you could kinda feel like the chars were a live in there right??? i mean i dont wanna be alone in this it would make me feel kinda weird

Oh well-developed characters certainly have life-like qualities and personalities. A lot of authors find their characters behave 'independently,' so to speak. Really, the author's sense of this character's personality is so strong that they sense what this character would do were they a real person. It's like imagining your best friend in a certain scenario; they're not really in that scenario, but you sense what could happen because your mind is able to build their personality.

The human imagination is absolutely incredible. We can theorise, build scenarios and personas... People can even redefine their own persona in the light of one they envisage, perhaps one based on their interpretation of an artistic piece, be it a video game, a film, a painting, book etc.

As long as you don't think the FF characters are physically real, which I'm sure you don't!

 

[Basch1990]

Oh well-developed characters certainly have life-like qualities and personalities. A lot of authors find their characters behave 'independently,' so to speak. Really, the author's sense of this character's personality is so strong that they sense what this character would do were they a real person. It's like imagining your best friend in a certain scenario; they're not really in that scenario, but you sense what could happen because your mind is able to build their personality.

The human imagination is absolutely incredible. We can theorise, build scenarios and personas... People can even redefine their own persona in the light of one they envisage, perhaps one based on their interpretation of an artistic piece, be it a video game, a film, a painting, book etc.

As long as you don't think the FF characters are physically real, which I'm sure you don't!

lol of course i don't no matter how much i wish Yuna or Lightning were physically real... i just have that feeling that in a well tuned game, book, movie, painting etc. its like we create a whole new world where these things live through there own lives for eternity...

 

[Donald Trump]

I don't think art is alive. However I wouldn't say it's dead.
That's mainly because I don't think the meaning of a book or a piece of art is static. It may not be the meaning that the creator intended it to have though. Art can gain meanings simply by placing it into another context. But I wouldn't go so far as to say that it is alive.

 

[Will Graham]

I don't think art is alive, but it certainly has more to it than a blank piece of paper or an e-mail from the King of Nigeria trying to sell me penis enlarging cat pills. I'd feel bad about destroying a book, a painting, or a sculpture but I don't think they are alive. I don't think anyone could, would you call ruining them murder?

 

[Shu]

Art usually shows depth of creation. The only art I don't like is "recreation" or trace art. Hence why more times than not GFX on FFF is not an actual art form, but more of a skill set that is attained. Granted some I've seen take an image far beyond what the originally stock had to offer, and render an object out of a small picture, and actually applied art to it. This I tend to actually marvel at, due to the fact alone, the picture and it's surroundings meant nothing, but once the object was rendered from the original stock and layered 50,000 different ways in order to change the ambiance and actually applies emotion to it, it showed the artist's true form. So recreation to me is 90% not art, but more of a remix.

While actual art, I think at the granular level is very much alive due to how much the person put's him/herself onto the painting/drawing canvas. The same can be applied to music. Most artists almost try to find perfection in what they put on paper. Having to take some idea and make it their own, in which no one else has ever though of is near impossible these days. True artists go unnoticed most often times due to it.

Whether it be from a dream or what, it takes real creativity to live through your art. That's what I think the definition of "art being alive" actually is. When one applies him/herself to his own ideals, and no one elses and brings forth new art (life almost)..

Also I think the artists ability to explore all areas is a must to find basically their "soul" if you will. I am fascinated with morbid/angst art, due to the beauty in it. Not because of the "death, blood, anger etc", but because it's a venue people choose to be afraid of. It's the things people choose to not look at due to they find it disgusting, when to me, I find that a shame. By shutting one off due to the inability to understand and mold anger, or to shut out the dead, due to it's not "right" in societies eyes; it leaves the area almost forbidden and neglected and misunderstood. I can say the same thing about the music I listen to. Most things that the FCC tries to censor these days, are the really the only thing I listen to. There might be a few mainstream bands, but meh.. very few.

Tool and it's amazing art and animation from Alex Grey and before him Adam from the band. The disturbing videos, that are totally beautiful claymation, come from all the band members. This is from Alex Grey:

 

[Richard B Riddick]

I think its just a symbolic thing used to hype art and lend the impression that there's more depth and importance to it than there actually is.

An attractive woman nude.

No painting or art form will even compare to the artistry and magnificence of that.

Apologies in advance if my views are a little.... off.