My sister arrived home for the holidays with stories from her new life in the midwest. One story acquainted me to an old, sprightly woman whose hobby filled her house with yarn and plastic board structures, signs, and kleenex box covers. While the yarn creations awed my sister by their complexity, they were kitsch.
Is this art? Is art the act of creating, the act of creating something expressive, or the act of creating something expressive which contains other ambiguous words: beauty, love, and inspiration?
I am inclined to identify art from the creator’s standpoint. How was it intended? Did the act of creation lend itself to self-discovery and pronouncement, or to hobby and output. I knit. My socks and scarves are beautiful and my stitches very straight, but knitting is not my art. A friend of mine’s quilting, however, reveals her art. Let me realize, that by assigning art to the intention, I renounce accidental art. Can art be an accident?
2 comments:
Ah, sorry for the advertising posts. Sigh. I modified the settings of the blog so that only members of this blog can post comments. Damn advertisers ruining it for everyone... hmm, except that I believe that marketing is an art. A revolutionary art. Ah, reminds me of the article I read on the treadmill this morning... I will have to blog about it...
Anyway, very good question, Laura. And such a hard one to answer. I am inclined to think that intent and interpretation make art. The Dada movement really clarified that for me, where a urinal and a can of poop could end up in the world's most prestigious art museums. So my thinking is that accidental becomes art when I see it that way.
It begs the question: is it art when it is a concept, or only once it has been physically realized? When I see a scene that strikes my fancy, is it art? Or only when I take a picture of it?
Thanks for clearing the ads. I appreciate your comment--I like the idea of intent and interpretation. But there is accidental art, or is there?
My reaction to seeing a scene and taking a picture of it is that until you take a picture of it the scene may be artful but is not your art; I think your art would be how the picture represents what you saw.
As a photographer, I'm curious if you agree.
Post a Comment