Is it BAD art if you love it?
 

They say beauty is in the eye of the beholder; is appreciation in the heart of the appreciator? :vigil:


Please tell me your secret art preferences......I promise not to tell a soul! :canadian:


Oh, and please take the poll! :praying:

If I like it does that make it GOOD art?

I think so.

Art is everywhere and if it's pleasing to you, then it is good art.

No! :fart:

<--- "This is Art"

(i have a t-shirt that says that) :)

My opinion:

Art is art regardless of whether it is appreciated or not.

Art is art whether you/I/she or he deems it good or bad.

Art is sometimes art (or becomes art) despite not being created with that intent or for that purpose, despite the fact that most standard dictionaries define it as the product of an intentional act of creation.


Leo Tolstoy wrote an essay in 1896, I agree with many of his points, here is a decent summation snipped

"Leo Tolstoy’s What is Art? (1896) is a treatise concerning the nature and purpose of art, describing how art can express moral values. Tolstoy does not define art in terms of its ability to express form and beauty, but instead defines art in terms of its ability to communicate concepts of morality. For Tolstoy, aesthetic values are defined by moral values.

According to Tolstoy, art cannot be defined as an activity which produces beauty. Beauty cannot be defined objectively, and therefore cannot be used as a criterion to define what is, or is not, art. The aim of art is not merely to produce beauty, or to provide pleasure, enjoyment, or entertainment. Art is a means of communication, and is an important means of expression of any experience, or of any aspect of the human condition.

Tolstoy defines art as an expression of a feeling or experience in such a way that the audience to whom the art is directed can share that feeling or experience. Art does not belong to any particular class of society. To limit the subject matter of art to the experiences of a particular class of society is to deny that art can be important for all of society. Tolstoy criticizes the belief that art is only relevant to a particular class of society, saying that this is a misconception which can lead to obscurity and decadence in art.

According to Tolstoy, good art is intelligible and comprehensible. Bad art is unintelligible and incomprehensible. The more that art restricts itself to a particular audience, the more obscure and incomprehensible it becomes to people outside that particular audience. Good art is not confusing and incomprehensible to most people. To the contrary, good art can communicate its meaning to most people, because it expresses its meaning in a way which can be understood by everyone."

Love your poll ;)
 

Only an Outsider Artist can raise a poll like this :) :artist:


I do have a velvet tiger from a journey to Tijuna, in the garage now~beside Elvis--->

Art is .~..subscribing so I can post later.

My car is ready.:praying: with the bill.....
No, my car doesn't have a bill. ;)

One preference!
 

http://www.museumofbadart.org/

it is all relative to me

:moonstars: I'm a HUGE Salvidor Dali fan, I even have a clock melting in my kitchen. ^_^

I agree with some previous comments here.

Art is just that Art. I think Art definitely is one of those things where the beauty is in the eye of the beholder. There are no standards of what constitutes art and what doesn't.

I have some pretty out there pieces in my home that I know a lot of people don't "get" or appreciate but to me they resonate and I connect with them. So while they are in no way shape or form mainstream I consider them beautiful pieces.

I confess I LIKED some of the art in the Museum of Bad Art link!

The problem with art, music, literature is, of course, that someone's trash is another's treasure. How do you define "bad"-that it doesn't follow the rules of how to draw, uses the "wrong" colors, or is just weird? Picasso was weird for his time, and obviously has many fans today.

Same with literature and music-what's cutting edge at one time was probably labeled bad, immoral, or both.

In the eye of the beholder, and all that ;)

I am guilty of owning 'bad' art.
I have older tapestries of dogs playing poker and billards. I have a bronze mermaid lamp, her nipples light, too. I have a large spoon and fork hanging in my kitchen, present from a friends grandma.
I have a few cheese pieces around the house.

Is any art bad? Isn't "bad art" an oxymoron?

:|

Is it a question of being good or bad art or just if it is
ART?

I mean some stuff..u just have to wonder.....
many years ago when my one daughter was aobut 5 we went to this gallery opening and there in the corner was about 30 computer monitors..in a pile....
my daughter says oh mommy look at the mess......the artist got kind of upset, seems it was an installation.....(I was the one writing the review on it for a local paper)....and quoted my daughter.... :)

Just as beauty is in the eye of the beholder, I believe art is as well......
My style taste,,,is different than yours..thank goodness there are different forms, types and genres of it so we all can hang what we think is wonderful and beautiful on our walls..or in my case...put on my lawn.....
Dont get art cause u think it is what u are supposed to like...then it truly is bad art..cause it is inhibiting your self excpression throu the style of art you truly love.

Debby!!! I love those giant forks and spoons..I saw some at Pier one the other day....jen and I both wanted them actually if they go on sale they will probably be in our kitchen....I dont like to pay full price.......I keep hoping one of the auctions i go to will have some.....