Why is "art" a dirty word?

This forum is for the general discussion of Anime Music Videos.

Re: Why is "art" a dirty word?

Postby trythil » Wed Nov 09, 2005 12:59 pm

Beowulf wrote:What is the first thing that pops into your head when you hear someone say the word "art", in any context?


I'm not sure, but the first thing Google Image Search turns up is a half-naked woman.

Beowulf wrote:I bring this up because this is the only artistic community that I know of that has an EXTREMELY vocal self-depricating element.


I'm glad there IS one. It makes it very easy to treat this stuff as the hobby that it is; it additionally makes it very easy to do a little bit of humorous introspection and poke fun at AMVs within AMVs.
This is a block of text that can be added to posts you make. There is a 512 character limit.
trythil
is
 
Joined: 23 Jul 2002
Location: Llanfairpwllgwyngyllgogerychwyrndrobwllllantysiliogogogoch

Postby JaddziaDax » Wed Nov 09, 2005 1:04 pm

This is going to be longer than I expected

Kalium wrote:Anyway, remix culture as a rule tends to be regarded as no higher than the source it's made from. Anime and the music we use tend to be considered low culture, so thus AMVs are not high art.

Nobody said it had to make sense.


Some of the music used is considered "high culture" o.0 and some of the anime too (how many awards has Miyazaki won??) though usually RARELY at the same time...

badmartialarts wrote:I'll offer some answers, though. Many people dislike the term 'art' applied to AMVs because in a sense, what we do is collage work.


callages also tend to be considered art... maybe not "high" art but art none the less, and I was going to say that!!!!!

godix wrote:Michelangelo didn't sit around debating the definition of art, he just went and painted the sistine chapel.


he also tagged along with Divinchi and discected bodies which was against the law at the time...

And the Mona Lisa is a Self Portrait in Drag :P (no really it is!!)

TaranT wrote:Even classical art isn't all that it's cracked up to be (ref. the movie Amadeus).


AH! Good movie! and aparently somewhat accurate,

shakesphere was considered a hack in his time too... he was what I consider Disney of the Renaissance lol, he liked to make up words too...

But so does Dr Seuess but he did it alot more fun than Shakesphere :P

and once again with the Mona Lisa is actually Divinchy in Drag (its been proven!!!) though I love just about all of Divinchy's art (even if i cant spell)
Especially the one of the baby in the womb! YAY Discection!!!

arzuro wrote:Most anime and most music are not art, as it is, amv's have way better chances of being regarded as art cause they aren't made for ecenomic gain.


people can make money off their arts! who says they cant... we cant legally make money off of AMVs but thats another subject.

How many craft fairs have I been to where people sell their original creations? how many meuseums have PAID for certain pieces to be shown in their halls? and take a walk through San Francisco and visit some of those hoity toity painting shops that sell countless pieces of art... Go to a resturant that has high rating sometime, where master chefs create new foods every day, cooking is an art, how many books has Emril sold? then we can always get into novelists... o.0 or Manga artists....
User avatar
JaddziaDax
Crazy Cat Lady!
 
Joined: 16 Mar 2004
Location: somewhere i think O.o
Status: I has a TRU Arceus

Postby JaddziaDax » Wed Nov 09, 2005 1:27 pm

HA! heres a good example of how subjective "Atr" is:

Theres a lady that KILLS little bunnies, chickens and cats, places their heads on Vases and give them fancy little reniassance collars and what not, puts cute little hats on their heads... kills mice to make finger puppets out of them, then proceeds to take photos of it... The photos are considered art by some people, and to others its considered animal cruelity...

There was once an interactive art exibit where a man had filled several blenders with water and placed goldfish into them, the display even encouraged people to turn on the blenders, and it was considered a fantastic desplay untill someone turned one of them on... then it caused a huge scandal amongst the art community...

The Period Blood lady I believe has been mentioned at the beginning of the post, where she uses her own menstration to create her art, alot of people think its gross...

I remember a cover to an album at one point (atleast I remember my husband talking about it) where people thought the cover was really pretty... untill they found out it was blood and semen o.0

Then theres this

:P art is way too subjective...
User avatar
JaddziaDax
Crazy Cat Lady!
 
Joined: 16 Mar 2004
Location: somewhere i think O.o
Status: I has a TRU Arceus

Postby Otohiko » Wed Nov 09, 2005 1:37 pm

G. Gurdjieff wrote:The keys to all the ancient arts are lost, were lost many centuries ago. And therefore there is no longer a sacred art embodying laws of the Great Knowledge, and so serving to influence the instincts of the multitude.

There are no creators today. The contemporary priests of art do not create but imitate. They run after beauty and the likeness or what is called originality, without posessing even the neccesary knowledge. Not knowing, and not being able to do anything, since they are groping in the dark, they are praised by the crownd, which places them on a pedestal. Sacred art vanished and left behind only the halo which surrounded its servants. All the current words about the divine spark, talent, genius, creation, sacred art, have no solid basis - they are anachronisms. What are these talents? We will talk about them on some suitable occasion.

Either the shoemaker's craft must be called art, or all contemporary art must be called craft. In what way is a shoemaker sewing fashionable custom shoes of beautiful design inferior to an artist who pursues the aim of imitation or originality? With knowledge, the sewing of shoes may be sacred art too, but without it, a priest of contemporary art is worse than a cobbler


Before you ask if I actually take the above quote seriously, I certainly do. :roll:
Otohiko
 
Joined: 05 May 2003

Postby inthesto » Wed Nov 09, 2005 2:25 pm

Either the shoemaker's craft must be called art, or all contemporary art must be called craft.


I like this quote. I applaud Oto for bringing it up.

Remember, there was a time not too long ago that art was appreciated only insofar that it was a craft. That perception has somehow oddly mixed with its opposed perception (that art is appreciated in its ability to stir a response out of the audience) to produce the common perception of art today, which I basically think sucks.
User avatar
inthesto
Beef Basket
 
Joined: 13 Mar 2004
Location: PARTIES
Status: PARTIES

Postby Sierra Lorna » Wed Nov 09, 2005 9:55 pm

Of course AMVs are art. :? "Art" can really just be defined as something that someone puts on display for others to see. A leaf on the ground isn't really art, but if someone intentionally decides to put it in a frame in their living room to have it on display for people to look at, then it's art. If we AMV creators decide to make an AMV and show it at a contest or to an online community, or even just to a couple of friends, then our work should of course be considered art. But whether it's good art or not is entirely up to the viewer...
Image
ImageImage
User avatar
Sierra Lorna
 
Joined: 19 Jan 2002
Location: BC, Canada

Postby Rozard » Thu Nov 10, 2005 1:50 am

Sierra Lorna wrote:Of course AMVs are art. :? "Art" can really just be defined as something that someone puts on display for others to see. A leaf on the ground isn't really art, but if someone intentionally decides to put it in a frame in their living room to have it on display for people to look at, then it's art. If we AMV creators decide to make an AMV and show it at a contest or to an online community, or even just to a couple of friends, then our work should of course be considered art. But whether it's good art or not is entirely up to the viewer...

Well played :o
Image
RichLather: We are guests of this forum, and as such we do not make the rules.
BishounenStalker The freedom to suck is what makes the Internet rock.
User avatar
Rozard
 
Joined: 31 Oct 2001
Location: West Palm Beach, FL

Postby imphill » Thu Nov 10, 2005 12:49 pm

This getting way too off topic:
back to the topic question....

Art is not a dirty word....its just sometime, some people make art which showes a little more then socity accepts :wink: . So really the question bores down to: "Why do we class some art as dirty?"
"At least i have chicken"
- Ols Klingon Proverb

>Mone Mone!
>Is that right?
>MONE!!
>hmmm...
User avatar
imphill
 
Joined: 13 Oct 2005
Location: At my desk.....

Postby Sephiroth » Thu Nov 10, 2005 1:08 pm

Art is something that gets some kind of responce. THat's the only real meaning i can give art, because everything that i consider to be art moves me in some way shape or form.
User avatar
Sephiroth
 
Joined: 19 Dec 2000
Location: California

Postby Otohiko » Thu Nov 10, 2005 1:26 pm

4 personally - the amateur of anti-art. Take, for example, my clips RPBP.

Dada - forever! :D
Otohiko
 
Joined: 05 May 2003

Postby pen-pen2002 » Thu Nov 10, 2005 3:59 pm

If you guys want to see some real art, take a look at this!

:roll: :wink:
Image
User avatar
pen-pen2002
 
Joined: 02 Sep 2001
Location: Grinnell, IA Procrastination Meter: Code Lemon-Lime

Postby Otohiko » Thu Nov 10, 2005 4:13 pm

pen-pen2002 wrote:If you guys want to see some real art, take a look at this!

:roll: :wink:


No, this.

:roll:
Otohiko
 
Joined: 05 May 2003

Postby [Mike of the Desert] » Thu Nov 10, 2005 4:27 pm

I've been reading only the first two pages of this topic by far but.. I just want to say: Wonderful Thread. First of all, Beowulf, you really done a smart question, especially with what we're been seeing in this site, but In my opinion you answered this by yourself just some days ago: because this org is full of kids, people that, in some way, I would call "ignorant". But it's really complicated to explain.

I have to admit, everything, and I mean really everything I would desire to say here and now, it is been already been said in the first page of this topic, so.. Wow, really wonderful arguments and answers everyone. I'm nearly moved. :cry:


;)
ImageImage
Image
User avatar
[Mike of the Desert]
 
Joined: 25 Jul 2003
Location: Earth -> Europe -> Italy -> Rome -> Cerveteri -> Sasso -> Home -> Mike's Room
Status: Lonely

Postby Sephiroth » Thu Nov 10, 2005 8:17 pm

Yes i do like this topic alot also Unlike another one which shall remane nameless.

I difinativly consider myself an artist, in part because money is not the sole motivation. Yet i do go to a comercial art school. What i did learn about art in history is that almost every single 'great' work of art was commishoned by other people for an artist. THe sistine chaple is a great example of this. That Art was used as a means to get people interested in the church again.

THe thing that really hit the art community was the advent of the photograph. Up until then artists were basicly the only way to get an image of you that was going to last, now a days everyone has babby pictures. Back then only a few people had thier image dotted down so thier family could look back at them when they died.

So once the photograph came out the main purpose that people gave art, recording reality went out the window. After all a photograph captures light perfectly and can't distrote lines (truth is another issue). So various movements popped up in order to have art keep some sort of relevance. Surrealism and every other art movement ame out of these things.

Jumping ahead to the complete disamation of at. We have Andy Worhole putting down a toilet seat and calling it art, as a statement that it's art because i call it so. Image reporduction also exists as a kind of artform, after all thiers that famous picture of 8 different Maryln Monroas all done up differently.

Video and film are relativly recent compared to say paint and sculpture so the big problem that this media faces is that films arent considered art by the avant guard who claim to say what art is. THe reason AMVs arent considered art is in part due to thier age. THe question must be asked have we really reached the point where we can look at it and call it art just yet.

Ive allways had trouble dealing with this day and age being called hte post modern period in part becuase were still in it. How can you possibly know what periodd of time your in until youve gone past it. After all the people that lived in the dark ages didn't call them the dark ages we did that after in order to bash them historicly(And that time period is prove of why religeon should never run any government).

So are AMVs at the point were we can call them anything. We need a good long while to distance ourselves from them look back and then make a judgement with the entire picture. Otherwise were just walking out in the middle of the video before we've seen it.

AMVs are an interesting hobbie but they still have yet to reach the point that they need to. Ok we've gotten tons of compositing and Euphoria now but much like the 2 VCR method i predict that many of what is considered top notch will be laughable in a few years. After all consider that 6 years ago editing on a computer and being able to do a fade were something that was the top of the line. It's something that i atrubite to the old school 'big shots'. If many of them had started at the same level as many of the current newbies would they still have the same position that they do? Who knows but Duane Johnson may not have been as high ranked as he was. And of corse there's Kevin Caldwell, if you released Engle now with the total number of Eva videos that are out there how would it fare?

If AMV are to be considered an artform, it is one of apropriation. In many a ways they should be Called Apropriation Media Videos That would let many of the videos that people call AMVs to actually be AMVs.



Like ANy other artist i will constantly do strange and new things. I do hope that the community as a whole can do the same. Stagnation if anything is going to be the thing that kills AMVs.

As allways the choice lies with each of you guys. So lets give the future out best shot. later all.

And thanks again for this topic, made me feel glad to actually go to the forums for once.
User avatar
Sephiroth
 
Joined: 19 Dec 2000
Location: California

Postby requiett » Fri Nov 11, 2005 4:38 am

Image
You're all wrong. THIS is Art.
User avatar
requiett
 
Joined: 12 May 2003
Location: Alaska

PreviousNext

Return to General AMV

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests