Art - BF2S Forums

Pages: 1 2 3 4

2011-12-20 18:12:46

[-DER-]Omega: membeR; +188|6864|Lithuania

Uzique, I'm no art/lit expert but I do largely agree with you and what you've been saying in this thread and the other. Art shouldn't be defined as something that's completely ambiguous and without boundaries. However, regarding those revolvers as an example, why can't the engravings qualify as a form of art? The engraver could've chosen a copper plate or what have you to make his etchings on and hung it up in a museum and no one would even think twice about questioning its state as a form of art. Instead, he chose to display his work on a different medium, a metal firearm, regardless of its functionality. If someone were to depict the Mona Lisa on the grip of a pistol instead of oil on poplar, you would not view it as a work of art?

https://bf3s.com/sigs/fe717ed1eb823c939460a42f15bced7dd0057c51.png

2011-12-20 18:12:48

Uzique: dasein.; +2,865|6507

SEREMAKER wrote:
by definition not art but its in my line of work and theres a few others out there that also find this beautiful

yep, no denying that. a beautiful bit of craftsmanship. i don't mean to demean something when i call it 'craft' instead of 'art' - they're just different aesthetic categories. you'll also find if you read much kant or philosophy about aesthetics, generally, that beauty and Beauty are two different things. Beauty with a capital b is this romantic notion linked to all forms of idealism, metaphysics, and generally transcending the self. i find that saddle beautiful. wordsworth found the view over tintern abbey Beautiful. it implies some sort of spiritual revelation.

_{libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual}. _{http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/}

2011-12-20 18:15:16

Uzique: dasein.; +2,865|6507

[-DER-]Omega wrote:
Uzique, I'm no art/lit expert but I do largely agree with you and what you've been saying in this thread and the other. Art shouldn't be defined as something that's completely ambiguous and without boundaries. However, regarding those revolvers as an example, why can't the engravings qualify as a form of art? The engraver could've chosen a copper plate or what have you to make his etchings on and hung it up in a museum and no one would even think twice about questioning its state as a form of art. Instead, he chose to display his work on a different medium, a metal firearm, regardless of its functionality. If someone were to depict the Mona Lisa on the grip of a pistol instead of oil on poplar, you would not view it as a work of art?

this is according to kant's definition of 'intention'. a work of art such as the mona lisa is made purely for aesthetic contemplation - it's the product of a pretty privileged form of labour and what kant calls "free-play", i.e. with no ulterior motivation or secondary purpose other than to just be art-in-itself. decoration on a pistol in the craft sense normally always is to boosts the value or collectability of the item. it makes it more desirable as something you want to appropriate. this is how kant distinguishes between a work of art and a work of craft. if a gun was made for nothing other than to be showcased in a glassbox then it could be a work of art, categorically speaking, yes, but it would dependn one's individual judgement as to if it really was a successful one.

Last edited by Uzique (2011-12-20 18:16:00)

_{libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual}. _{http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/}

2011-12-20 18:15:54

rdx-fx: ...; +955|6628

The engravings on a firearm may be Artistic. The firearm itself is just the canvas, as would be a copper plate with the same engravings.

2011-12-20 18:20:55

Doctor Strangelove: Real Battlefield Veterinarian.; +1,758|6505

I'd say that video games can be art, but I don't think any games made yet qualify as art.

2011-12-20 18:22:27

SEREMAKER: BABYMAKIN EXPERT √; +2,187|6605|Mountains of NC

A gun or all guns. As example : i have an engraved colt revolver thats over a hundred years old. Its never been shot nor shall it ever. Its rests on my wall for guests to enjoy

https://static.bf2s.com/files/user/17445/carhartt.jpg

2011-12-20 18:27:03

Uzique: dasein.; +2,865|6507

Doctor Strangelove wrote:
I'd say that video games can be art, but I don't think any games made yet qualify as art.

some games like max payne and half life (when the studios were young and idealistic) showed great promise. aesthetically they had everything that a narrative single-player form (coming from a literature perspective) would demand: complex themes, characters, a consistent tone/style, plot, etc. they achieved what you'd call an 'aesthetic unity', which basically just means a total success in executing the intended idea. it's all been downhill from there.

_{libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual}. _{http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/}

2011-12-20 18:29:35

Uzique: dasein.; +2,865|6507

SEREMAKER wrote:
A gun or all guns. As example : i have an engraved colt revolver thats over a hundred years old. Its never been shot nor shall it ever. Its rests on my wall for guests to enjoy

that could be a work of art, sure. if it was made and engraved and designed only for contemplation. basically if the engravings are more important than the fact it's on a gun (which raises separate questions about why that artist decided to use a gun as his 'canvas' in the first place). but if all that makes sense, then it could be a work of art, yes.

in the gun thread you stated something more like "all guns are works of art" or something to that effect, which i would severely disagree with. i wouldn't even say that most 'engraved' or decorated guns are works of art. if it serves only to increase value/collectivity, then it is craft, not art. i'm taking a strict line with kant on this one because i agree 100%. it's the same again with my analogy to ipods: engraved with fancy covers, which are basically ostentatious signs of wealth, do not make it an art-object.

_{libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual}. _{http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/}

2011-12-20 18:30:11

Trotskygrad: бля; +354|6036|Vortex Ring State

Uzique wrote:
Doctor Strangelove wrote:
I'd say that video games can be art, but I don't think any games made yet qualify as art.
some games like max payne and half life (when the studios were young and idealistic) showed great promise. aesthetically they had everything that a narrative single-player form (coming from a literature perspective) would demand: complex themes, characters, a consistent tone/style, plot, etc. they achieved what you'd call an 'aesthetic unity', which basically just means a total success in executing the intended idea. it's all been downhill from there.

would you say half-life 2 was as idealistic? or did it succumb to the entire "big trends" mentality with it's semi-open world environment, and boilerplate "occupation forces" combine?

2011-12-20 18:35:16

Uzique: dasein.; +2,865|6507

you know, i'm not sure i could say. i haven't thought about gaming-qua-art much before. i'm interested in it but i simply haven't formulated my thoughts enough to come up with a cogent argument/theory. the tragic thing for gaming is that it completely lacks this secondary industry: criticism, theory, academia. there are some niche academics working towards cultural and sociological studies of 'gaming' but they are all almost universally pessimistic. the best one i have read views gaming as an artistic critique of neoliberalism. but that's not enough; working towards a definition of purpose by negatively criticizing something else does not quite serve 100%. the real tragedy for gaming is that the entire industry - both primary producers/designers/gamers and secondary critics/theorists/academics - have succumbed to the market. look at a site like IGN. it's basically a 'bought press'. thus the dialogue between artist/critic becomes mere fawning and adulation, normally for cash-subsistence. this isn't how it happens in real arts: criticism and theory are vital forces in literature and the visual arts, for example, because they are distanced and do not give in to fellating the artist. similarly they don't care about the market or whatever prevailing economic ideology there is. good criticism and good theory has been around for far longer than this current capitalistic system. the games industry is completely, wholly rigged up in this system, which is its entire problem. this is approaching the cynical view of marcuse, who basically states you can't extricate yourself from the system that has created you without a revolution - basically gaming will never be a high-ideal artform until capitalism fucks off (in his case in preference for marxism). this is of course all very lofty and academic and its wholly up to you how much salt you have on your fries.

Last edited by Uzique (2011-12-20 18:36:39)

_{libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual}. _{http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/}

2011-12-20 18:37:23

SEREMAKER: BABYMAKIN EXPERT √; +2,187|6605|Mountains of NC

Uzique wrote:
SEREMAKER wrote:
A gun or all guns. As example : i have an engraved colt revolver thats over a hundred years old. Its never been shot nor shall it ever. Its rests on my wall for guests to enjoy
that could be a work of art, sure. if it was made and engraved and designed only for contemplation. basically if the engravings are more important than the fact it's on a gun (which raises separate questions about why that artist decided to use a gun as his 'canvas' in the first place). but if all that makes sense, then it could be a work of art, yes.

in the gun thread you stated something more like "all guns are works of art" or something to that effect, which i would severely disagree with. i wouldn't even say that most 'engraved' or decorated guns are works of art. if it serves only to increase value/collectivity, then it is craft, not art. i'm taking a strict line with kant on this one because i agree 100%. it's the same again with my analogy to ipods: engraved with fancy covers, which are basically ostentatious signs of wealth, do not make it an art-object.

My post was firearm are/is art. Now im not advocating that every single firearm out there is art. Far from that, im the first to say there are some disgusting looking firearms. But something from a time period before computers, a time that a person had to actually perfect every single piece and shape of a weapon. A time that you had to go through several trial and errors.

2011-12-20 18:48:59

Uzique: dasein.; +2,865|6507

again though that appeals to craft. technology is a separate issue, i.e. how easy it is to make a gun. the fact that every gun had to made individually before factory production didn't make every gun a work of art - it's like saying every chair carved by a carpenter or every piece of clothing stitched entirely by hand were works of art. they're crafts at the end of the day. gun-making is a craft, which can be done to an artisan-like level of impressive skill. i can't deny that certain individual cases can be 'artworks' though, in the sense that they are made only for display and in the sense that their design far outweighs their function as weapons. that freeing up of the object and admitting anything into the realms of art (if it satisfies the aesthetic criteria we're talking about) is the work of duchamps. early 20th century. that's why there's so much confusion about what is art and what isn't now: the entire objective world has been potentially admitted to the gallery. but there's a lot more to it than just decoration.

_{libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual}. _{http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/}

2011-12-20 18:50:35

rdx-fx: ...; +955|6628

Uzique wrote:
in the gun thread you stated something more like "all guns are works of art" or something to that effect, which i would severely disagree with. i wouldn't even say that most 'engraved' or decorated guns are works of art. if it serves only to increase value/collectivity, then it is craft, not art. i'm taking a strict line with kant on this one because i agree 100%. it's the same again with my analogy to ipods: engraved with fancy covers, which are basically ostentatious signs of wealth, do not make it an art-object.

The short premise, for me, is that;
"Art, in mechanical design, is to apply mastery of technical skills, deep knowledge of the relevant field, and innovative insight, to drastically improve the form and function of a device."

Not rote incremental improvement. Not decorative affectations.
To be Art within that field, it has to be innovation and insight completely true to the form and function of the medium.

Then again, I'm a fan of old school Bauhaus industrial design & architecture.
'function determines the form. Out of the purity a design adheres to this imperative, an object determines its worth as Art'
Old school Bauhaus, not the pop-art derivative "art deco" bullshit it became in later years.

later Bauhaus - art deco chairs you couldn't sit in, that were more affectation sculpture than chair.
That's not industrial design art, that's pretentious bullshit and licking of patron's balls.

To go at it from the smoke-filled cafe art house angle, "Humans are tool using creatures. It is part of what separates us from other animals. We design, we think, we create, we make tools to help us do this. The insight into how we use our tools, combined with an insight into how the world interacts with us and our tools - that can be Art"

Last edited by rdx-fx (2011-12-20 19:00:59)

2011-12-20 18:56:02

tazz.: oz.; +1,338|6211|Sydney | ♥

I'm going to take a moment here to highlight that minecraft has significance in art.

that is all.

^{everything i write is a ramble and should not be taken seriously.... _{seriously. ♥}}

2011-12-20 18:59:36

unnamednewbie13: Moderator; +2,053|6808|PNW

I think what Uzique is trying to explain basically boils down to the abstract difference between art for the sake of craft and art for the sake of art. From an "engineering" viewpoint, there isn't a whole lot of difference, thus the futility of trying to hard to talk about it on a forum full of engineers and aspiring engineers.

I suppose if it comes off as being elitist, the same could be said for us rolling our eyes at hardware noobs on tech forums.

2011-12-20 19:02:24

rdx-fx: ...; +955|6628

unnamednewbie13 wrote:
I think what Uzique is trying to explain basically boils down to the abstract difference between art for the sake of craft and art for the sake of art. From an "engineering" viewpoint, there isn't a whole lot of difference, thus the futility of trying to hard to talk about it on a forum full of engineers and aspiring engineers.

I suppose if it comes off as being elitist, the same could be said for us rolling our eyes at hardware noobs on tech forums.

I think he's doing a fine job of explaining "Art 101" to a bunch of engineering types.

2011-12-20 19:03:25

Jay: Bork! Bork! Bork!; +2,006|5395|London, England

rdx-fx wrote:
unnamednewbie13 wrote:
I think what Uzique is trying to explain basically boils down to the abstract difference between art for the sake of craft and art for the sake of art. From an "engineering" viewpoint, there isn't a whole lot of difference, thus the futility of trying to hard to talk about it on a forum full of engineers and aspiring engineers.

I suppose if it comes off as being elitist, the same could be said for us rolling our eyes at hardware noobs on tech forums.
I think he's doing a fine job of explaining "Art 101" to a bunch of engineering types.

It could be the first time that uzique has ever been useful

"Ah, you miserable creatures! You who think that you are so great! You who judge humanity to be so small! You who wish to reform everything! Why don't you reform yourselves? That task would be sufficient enough."
-Frederick Bastiat

2011-12-20 19:20:00

rdx-fx: ...; +955|6628

Here's a wild idea;

The appreciation and desire for Art stems from the same roots as the desire for Religion;
The want for revealed insights, the desire to know more, the drive for enlightenment.
Scratch the surface of a Priest or Prophet, and you will find an Artist who never found his paintbrush.

Last edited by rdx-fx (2011-12-20 19:20:41)

2011-12-20 19:33:50

Uzique: dasein.; +2,865|6507

tazz. wrote:
I'm going to take a moment here to highlight that minecraft has significance in art.

that is all.

'significance'? significance to whom? the minecraft community? maybe. i think you're a bit misguided and idiotic to say minecraft has a significance in art or the art-world. nobody gives a shit about minecraft outside of your little cabal. cubism has significance in art. the thought of sigmund freud has significance in art. the printing and lithographic press has significance in art. minecraft? you sound like a twat.

Last edited by Uzique (2011-12-20 19:34:23)

_{libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual}. _{http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/}

2011-12-20 19:38:53

Uzique: dasein.; +2,865|6507

Jay wrote:
rdx-fx wrote:
unnamednewbie13 wrote:
I think what Uzique is trying to explain basically boils down to the abstract difference between art for the sake of craft and art for the sake of art. From an "engineering" viewpoint, there isn't a whole lot of difference, thus the futility of trying to hard to talk about it on a forum full of engineers and aspiring engineers.

I suppose if it comes off as being elitist, the same could be said for us rolling our eyes at hardware noobs on tech forums.
I think he's doing a fine job of explaining "Art 101" to a bunch of engineering types.
It could be the first time that uzique has ever been useful

i eagerly await your second monograph on statism in the works of hegel

is it being published with the harvard up or was it stanford? i forget

Last edited by Uzique (2011-12-20 19:39:13)

_{libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual}. _{http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/}

2011-12-20 19:42:12

Uzique: dasein.; +2,865|6507

rdx-fx wrote:
Here's a wild idea;

The appreciation and desire for Art stems from the same roots as the desire for Religion;
The want for revealed insights, the desire to know more, the drive for enlightenment.
Scratch the surface of a Priest or Prophet, and you will find an Artist who never found his paintbrush.

artistic expression is a form of self-transcendence, yes. art is an attempt to beat death, in many ways. art is also intensely spiritual and metaphysical, which is why its sometimes lost on empirical, positivist science types. for all of its rationalisation and theory and intellectual ivory-tower stuff a large amount of pure creation itself is also irrational. theories and hypotheses abound for 'why we create art' or 'why we tell stories' and they're closely linked to all sorts of philosophical/religious/sociological/psychological/anthropological goodness. i think finding an answer to that question is a lot like determining whether there really is a god. the logos is all powerful, though.

_{libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual}. _{http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/}

2011-12-20 19:56:39

Uzique: dasein.; +2,865|6507

idiot + wikipedia = intellectual
SCIENCE

i think you'd have to go to a university in germany like Ingolstadt... and for it to be the early 1800's.... for anyone to be obsessed with transcendental idealism. i'd say approx. zero arts students are 'obsessed' with that.

_{libertarian benefit collector - anti-academic super-intellectual}. _{http://mixlr.com/the-little-phrase/}

2011-12-21 00:55:56

Dilbert_X: The X stands for; +1,810|6143|eXtreme to the maX

https://resources1.news.com.au/images/2011/07/16/1226095/802249-lady-gaga.jpg

Русский военный корабль, иди на хуй!

2011-12-21 02:40:52

Jaekus: I'm the matchstick that you'll never lose; +957|5215|Sydney

Went and saw the Matisse exhibition they're currently displaying at GoMA (Gallery of Modern Art) here in Brisbane. Was quite impressed with not only his art of course but the manner in which it was curated. His linework was masterful.

2011-12-21 02:46:14

Jaekus: I'm the matchstick that you'll never lose; +957|5215|Sydney

On the whole "is it art or craft?" discussion, I've always seen craft as to be something that has a function, whereas art tends to have no practical application, it just is. It's a hard line to define but I feel I know the difference, just can't properly explain it right now

Pages: 1 2 3 4

Board footer

Jump to

BF2S Forums Art

SEREMAKER wrote:

[-DER-]Omega wrote:

Doctor Strangelove wrote:

SEREMAKER wrote:

Uzique wrote:

Doctor Strangelove wrote:

Uzique wrote:

SEREMAKER wrote:

Uzique wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

rdx-fx wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

tazz. wrote:

Jay wrote:

rdx-fx wrote:

unnamednewbie13 wrote:

rdx-fx wrote:

Board footer