[qprogeny79]

Originally Posted by dazedcola

Who's to say what is and isn't art.I mean is something "art" just because you hang it on a wall ?

according to some people, yes.

i'm taking aesthetics this semester and we've been talking about things like this for pretty much the whole semester. for your enlightenment let me give you the basic theories of art as i know it:

1) art is an imitation of reality. (plato, aristotle)
2) art is the expression of emotion. (leo tolstoy, r.g. collingwood)
3) art is significant form. (clive bell)
4) art is that which is intended for an artworld public. (arthur danto, george dickie)
5) art is a loosely defined set whose members are bound together by "family resemblances" to each other. (ludwig wittgenstein, maurice mandelbaum)
6) the concept "art" cannot be defined because to give such a definition would conflict with the creative and boundary-pushing nature of art. (morris weitz)
7) art is the selective recreation of reality according to an artist's metaphysical value judgments. (ayn rand)

there's some truth to all of this, but no one theory (i think) has a monopoly on the truth here.

[cottonrevenge]

I agree with the final definition most of all. Which may characterize me as a "stupid Post-modernist" to some let me guess you are moving from classical to contemporary definitions in your class?

[Proud Marie]

Originally Posted by cottonrevenge

once you know what an orgasm feels like there's no reason to have one again?

once youve been slapped in the face, theres no reason to be slapped again. infact there was no reason to be slapped in the first place.

my point is:
we all know what an audience waiting to hear music would sound like, we dont need to hear it to get the picture. this recording wasnt groundbreaking idea - it was just arrogant and unlistenable.

[qprogeny79]

Originally Posted by cottonrevenge

I agree with the final definition most of all. Which may characterize me as a "stupid Post-modernist" to some let me guess you are moving from classical to contemporary definitions in your class?

yeah, more or less. we didn't actually study objectivist aesthetics though -- i just threw that one in for good measure, and because i happen to like it.

[Glice]

Cage's 4'33" as act of philosophy; Lucier's latter sections are music, and quite enjoyable, the first 20-30 repititions passable; I tire of discussions on art, but prey continue all. No mention of Barthes/ autonomy so far - any takers?

[Toilet & Bowels]

the last 10 mins are pretty nice but the way the piece is set up in such an objective and scientific fashion drains much of the excitement that could be achieved had he gone about using the concept behind this piece in a more imaginative fashion

[Glice]

Originally Posted by Toilet & Bowels

the last 10 mins are pretty nice but the way the piece is set up in such an objective and scientific fashion drains much of the excitement that could be achieved had he gone about using the concept behind this piece in a more imaginative fashion

Funny you should say that, I thought the very same thing. In fact, I wrote a violin peice in which I did it backwards, and removed several steps along the way which I was most pleased with. I called it 'I am sitting in a room (beating the living daylights out of Alvin Fucking Lucier'. I should dig that out actually, 'twas quite fun.