For Blixa: Is all art "good?"

The Off-Topic forum for anything non-LDS related, such as sports or politics. Rated PG through PG-13.
_Blixa
_Emeritus
Posts: 8381
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2007 12:45 pm

Post by _Blixa »

Gadianton wrote:by the way, speaking of art. What do you guys think about my new av? I made it in photoshop playing around textures and lighting and I think it's bad ass. Feel free to speak honestly, I won't get mad. But if you think it sucks, it will probably hurt my feelings. Just so you know.


I think it looks like a door handle. A door handle to the anti-temple.
From the Ernest L. Wilkinson Diaries: "ELW dreams he's spattered w/ grease. Hundreds steal his greasy pants."
_Ren
_Emeritus
Posts: 1387
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2007 11:34 am

Post by _Ren »

Blixa wrote:Everyone is "entitled" to their opinion in some sense, but there are also such things as ignorant opinion and informed opinion. In the final instance I don't care what a person likes or dislikes, but it does rather make a difference to me if opinion is grounded in knowledge and understanding or is an off-the-cuff reaction to something unfamiliar and glanced at.

I'm pretty sure what you mean with this. To me, the difference seems to be that some people know what they like, but others know what they like and why. Or at least they know how to articulate that properly... Or they can demonstrate greater appreciation by knowing how it fits in the history and landscape of that particular art-form.

Again, relating it to music - I know what I liked before I realised why. And when I realised why, it kind of created a feedback loop into what I liked (like) in return...
_Blixa
_Emeritus
Posts: 8381
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2007 12:45 pm

Post by _Blixa »

RenegadeOfPhunk wrote:
Blixa wrote:Everyone is "entitled" to their opinion in some sense, but there are also such things as ignorant opinion and informed opinion. In the final instance I don't care what a person likes or dislikes, but it does rather make a difference to me if opinion is grounded in knowledge and understanding or is an off-the-cuff reaction to something unfamiliar and glanced at.

I'm pretty sure what you mean with this. To me, the difference seems to be that some people know what they like, but others know what they like and why. Or at least they know how to articulate that properly... Or they can demonstrate greater appreciation by knowing how it fits in the history and landscape of that particular art-form.

Again, relating it to music - I know what I liked before I realised why. And when I realised why, it kind of created a feedback loop into what I liked (like) in return...


and yet, as you said before, it wasn't a closed loop. Your understanding expanded what you liked, brought new things into your ken...

(a spiral rather than a loop a better metaphor here?)
From the Ernest L. Wilkinson Diaries: "ELW dreams he's spattered w/ grease. Hundreds steal his greasy pants."
_Ren
_Emeritus
Posts: 1387
Joined: Sat Jul 07, 2007 11:34 am

Post by _Ren »

Blixa wrote:and yet, as you said before, it wasn't a closed loop. Your understanding expanded what you liked, brought new things into your ken...

(a spiral rather than a loop a better metaphor here?)

Yeah - exactly. I'm thinking of a feedback loop in engineering terms, where some kind of control signal is fed back into itself and then produces a separate output. That output would well be a spiral, or a wave form of some kind.

One example - at one point I thought all 'electronic' music was s**t. The only real music is that played on 'real' instruments, by 'real' musicians.
...but as I discovered that the music I really liked was more about the composition, the 'feeling' etc. - rather than how many killer riffs some nutter lead has managed to work into his solo - then I realised: "So - why should electronic music be 'bad' again?".

I realised I had catagorised all electronic music as either 'Mindless techno' or 'Cheesy pop'.
Chemical brothers / DJ Shadow / Goldfrapp / Hybrid are all big faves of mine now. But at one point, I wouldn't have even considered them...

(Doesn't matter if anybody agrees with my musical taste or not - just getting the example across...)
_Blixa
_Emeritus
Posts: 8381
Joined: Fri Mar 23, 2007 12:45 pm

Post by _Blixa »

RenegadeOfPhunk wrote:
Blixa wrote:and yet, as you said before, it wasn't a closed loop. Your understanding expanded what you liked, brought new things into your ken...

(a spiral rather than a loop a better metaphor here?)

Yeah - exactly. I'm thinking of a feedback loop in engineering terms, where some kind of control signal is fed back into itself and then produces a separate output. That output would well be a spiral, or a wave form of some kind.

One example - at one point I thought all 'electronic' music was s**t. The only real music is that played on 'real' instruments, by 'real' musicians.
...but as I discovered that the music I really liked was more about the composition, the 'feeling' etc. - rather than how many killer riffs some nutter lead has managed to work into his solo - then I realised: "So - why should electronic music be 'bad' again?".

I realised I had catagorised all electronic music as either 'Mindless techno' or 'Cheesy pop'.
Chemical brothers / DJ Shadow / Goldfrapp / Hybrid are all big faves of mine now. But at one point, I wouldn't have even considered them...

(Doesn't matter if anybody agrees with my musical taste or not - just getting the example across...)


Tell me about it! God, I was the most autocratic punk ever! Nothing was good if it wasn't recorded in somebody's dad's garage with a screwed up tape deck. And yet, secretly, deep inside, I loved Burt Bacharach's lush musical arrangements... oh the shame...
From the Ernest L. Wilkinson Diaries: "ELW dreams he's spattered w/ grease. Hundreds steal his greasy pants."
_asbestosman
_Emeritus
Posts: 6215
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 10:32 pm

Post by _asbestosman »

I can get that having someone point out the art may make me appreciate it better. Or maybe not. I can try explaining what I find intriguing in math and computers and I'd probably bore most of you to death while those who are more knowledgable than me would be unimpressed.

It's more like I can appreciate your appreciation without appreciating it--because life's too short to get it all. In the mean time, I don't mind learning a few things here and there. I'm not sure there there even is such a thing as superior tastes. Maybe there is. I've never been convinced that superiority is that which is most conservative. I don't think Hymns or Classical music or Jazz is superior to Rock or Alternative or whatever. Those might all be superior to Rap though. ;)
That's General Leo. He could be my friend if he weren't my enemy.
eritis sicut dii
I support NCMO
_JAK
_Emeritus
Posts: 1593
Joined: Sun Jan 14, 2007 4:04 pm

Weak Definition

Post by _JAK »

Moniker wrote:Well, should we start an art thread for everyone else!? If I'm not supposed to answer you can delete this! :P

What makes art "good" for me is that it captures my attention in the sense that it is visually interesting. If it induces some sort of emotional or intellectual response for me I consider that "good" art. It may be something that is disturbing for me. Something that may even make me cringe. Makes me open my eyes a bit more and soak in the elements as my eyes move over the piece. A piece that expresses an emotion or thought in a way I've never considered before-- or if the piece expresses my own emotions or thoughts in a way that I haven't been able to do myself. Anything that I can't take my eyes off of -- that I may walk away from then turn to go back for a second look.

That is my definition. :)

I hope Blixa provides images!


Is pornography good art? I’ll bet you would L00K.

JAK
_Moniker
_Emeritus
Posts: 4004
Joined: Wed Dec 05, 2007 11:53 pm

Re: Weak Definition

Post by _Moniker »

JAK wrote:
Moniker wrote:Well, should we start an art thread for everyone else!? If I'm not supposed to answer you can delete this! :P

What makes art "good" for me is that it captures my attention in the sense that it is visually interesting. If it induces some sort of emotional or intellectual response for me I consider that "good" art. It may be something that is disturbing for me. Something that may even make me cringe. Makes me open my eyes a bit more and soak in the elements as my eyes move over the piece. A piece that expresses an emotion or thought in a way I've never considered before-- or if the piece expresses my own emotions or thoughts in a way that I haven't been able to do myself. Anything that I can't take my eyes off of -- that I may walk away from then turn to go back for a second look.

That is my definition. :)

I hope Blixa provides images!


Is pornography good art? I’ll bet you would L00K.

JAK


Hi Jak! I'm sure some art that I find pleasing is considered pornographic to some. I'm not really certain what you're speaking of when you speak of pornography? I'll guess here and say -- I don't consider girly mags as "good art".
_Bond...James Bond
_Emeritus
Posts: 4627
Joined: Tue Nov 07, 2006 4:49 am

Post by _Bond...James Bond »

Gadianton wrote:For Bond and Ab,

I agree, sort of, to the extent I'm the same way with a lot of things. But be aware that "what you like", even if you know what you like, can change with education. Some people like MP3s and sound systems with kind of crappy speakers and too much bass. But with some education on accoustics, mixing, sampling, imaging, and other things, some examples to work with, that same person a few hours later will be able to appreciate better sound. Same holds true with art, beer drinking, and literature.


I do have a couple semesters worth of art history, so it's not like I've seen the Mona Lisa, my 1st grade finger painting, and nothing else. I probably should have said that I won't reject certain pieces of art from a type of art I usually don't like.
"Whatever appears to be against the Book of Mormon is going to be overturned at some time in the future. So we can be pretty open minded."-charity 3/7/07
Post Reply