Emotions and Judgment

What is art? What is beauty?

Moderators: AMod, iMod

User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8385
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: Emotions and Judgment

Post by Hobbes' Choice » Wed Oct 26, 2016 9:41 pm

Terrapin Station wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote:There is also the same tendency in English to use Art as Arte (but perhaps with less force), the establishment art. I think the difference is that Spain-phones have missed the Protestant re-thinking and democracy has come late to many of their countries: this might explain why Anglophones are more likely to have seized the word to give to their children.

Personally I feel that Art has been so bloody disgraceful since The Fountain, that people have felt more free to apply the word to the things they do, rather than things that have lofty value. There can be art in cooking, talking, driving etc.. Art is democratized.
Are you sympathetic to the "Art Renewal Center" folks?
I had to look them up, but yes generally, though I can dig abstract too. Good abstract art can only be made by people who understand form, and are capable of figurative and realist work - no exceptions!

Here's what I am currently working on.
Screen Shot 2016-10-26 at 21.40.20.png
Screen Shot 2016-10-26 at 21.40.20.png (42.28 KiB) Viewed 1136 times
I hate lazy art. Art is more than just an idea, that the "Artist" can have and tell someone else to execute. If the guy with the ideas can't get his hands dirty then he's not the artist, just a designer.

User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 1488
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
Location: NYC Man

Re: Emotions and Judgment

Post by Terrapin Station » Wed Oct 26, 2016 10:05 pm

Very nice piece you're working on, Hobbes' Choice.

I don't agree with the Art Renewal Center folks' attitude, but not because I don't like stuff like Alma-Tadema, Bouguereau, etc. I'm rather an "omnivorous omniphile" when it comes to art (not just visual art, but music, films, etc.), and I've increasingly moved in that direction as I've gotten older. I don't love everything equally, but I try to appreciate everything and focus on what I consider to be the positive attributes of everything. I'm not fond of negative criticism of any art, really.

User avatar
TSBU
Posts: 825
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2016 5:46 pm

Re: Emotions and Judgment

Post by TSBU » Wed Oct 26, 2016 11:59 pm

Hobbes' Choice wrote: I hate lazy art. Art is more than just an idea, that the "Artist" can have and tell someone else to execute. If the guy with the ideas can't get his hands dirty then he's not the artist, just a designer.
Oompa loompa.

User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8385
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: Emotions and Judgment

Post by Hobbes' Choice » Thu Oct 27, 2016 7:53 pm

Terrapin Station wrote:Very nice piece you're working on, Hobbes' Choice.

I don't agree with the Art Renewal Center folks' attitude, but not because I don't like stuff like Alma-Tadema, Bouguereau, etc. I'm rather an "omnivorous omniphile" when it comes to art (not just visual art, but music, films, etc.), and I've increasingly moved in that direction as I've gotten older. I don't love everything equally, but I try to appreciate everything and focus on what I consider to be the positive attributes of everything. I'm not fond of negative criticism of any art, really.
I think realist art (but also anything you might call representational too) art has been neglected and tends to be scorned. So some promotion of realism is not a bad thing.
It's not the be all and end all, but there is so much shit abstract and conceptual out there that it tend to irk me that good quality crafted art gets sidelined.

User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8385
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: Emotions and Judgment

Post by Hobbes' Choice » Thu Oct 27, 2016 7:53 pm

TSBU wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote: I hate lazy art. Art is more than just an idea, that the "Artist" can have and tell someone else to execute. If the guy with the ideas can't get his hands dirty then he's not the artist, just a designer.
Oompa loompa.
keep taking the pills.

User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 1488
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
Location: NYC Man

Re: Emotions and Judgment

Post by Terrapin Station » Thu Oct 27, 2016 8:08 pm

Hobbes' Choice wrote:I think realist art (but also anything you might call representational too) art has been neglected and tends to be scorned. So some promotion of realism is not a bad thing.


I agree with that. I just don't care for denigrating other stuff in the process.

User avatar
TSBU
Posts: 825
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2016 5:46 pm

Re: Emotions and Judgment

Post by TSBU » Thu Oct 27, 2016 8:31 pm

Hobbes' Choice wrote:
TSBU wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote: I hate lazy art. Art is more than just an idea, that the "Artist" can have and tell someone else to execute. If the guy with the ideas can't get his hands dirty then he's not the artist, just a designer.
Oompa loompa.
keep taking the pills.
keep doing handjobs

User avatar
Conde Lucanor
Posts: 673
Joined: Mon Nov 04, 2013 2:59 am

Re: Emotions and Judgment

Post by Conde Lucanor » Sat Oct 29, 2016 3:42 am

Terrapin Station wrote:
Conde Lucanor wrote:Judging a painting (or any other type of artistic work) not necessarily means judging its universal artistic value, that is, its aesthetic value.
Although of course there's no such thing as universal artistic/aesthetic value.
Maybe, but as Kant well put it, aesthetic judgement implies a notion of universality, even after recognition of the subjectivity of such claim. When judging aesthetically, one behaves AS IF the object had the esteemed properties. Also, one could determine the current state of an artistic practice, with its known stylistic codes, compare it with new works that divert from the canon and come up with a pretty objective assessment of the gap between one and the other. You can give a value to that difference as manifestation of a creative process.

Terrapin Station wrote:The notion of artistic versus non-artistic semantic content seems dubious though.
Not really. You can find semantic content in a newspaper headline, without any aesthetic intention. It just gives information to decode right away. A picture can inform you of many things too, but in that sense it can also be just that: merely informative, even when it seeks an emotional response to the message. And then there are works which ask you to read something else: their own process of creation, the composition, the organization of the materials and techniques. The form becomes its content. That's why works of art can be reinterpreted and valued as art long after their original message or function has faded and is forgotten. We don't care much what Greek art really meant for the ancient Greeks, we care that it is a model of how to make sculptures, tragedies, architecture, etc. As Marx said: "...they still afford us artistic pleasure and that in a certain respect they count as a norm and as an unattainable model."
Terrapin Station wrote:
Conde Lucanor wrote: In that way, art in general simply serves a communicative and symbolic function, which can be judged subjectively, in terms of each person's own interest, his/her likes of dislikes.
Which is really the only way that anyone judges any art. The only other option is to basically report (and or make guesses about) other persons' judgments.
Well, no. There are distinctive artistic practices, ideologies, formal codes applied to composition and performance. You can compare among the works of any discipline and make objective assessments of them.
Terrapin Station wrote:
Conde Lucanor wrote:An empirical reader will judge according to the non-artistic meanings evoked by the work of art; the critical reader will judge according to rules of composition and techniques, in relation to other works of art.
The one thing that might make some sense there is the idea of judging something in relation to other works of art versus not doing that. The only problem I have with that is that any judgment necessarily involves a lot of stuff that doesn't have anything to do with works of art, so the distinction is still kind of messy.
If one is focused on artistic achievement, one can easily forget the other "lot of stuff". And the opposite is also true: you can focus on the other non-artistic stuff and forget there's an artistic intention behind it.
Terrapin Station wrote: Which is basically about looking at works formally versus not doing so, but formal assessment is still informed by biases and emotions that have nthing to do with artworks--they have to be, because prefering one composition to another, prefering one way of handling paint to another, and so on, aren't somehow contained in artworks themselves.
As said, form can serve many functions, not just aesthetic assessment. And not all artistic assesment is about likes or dislikes. I generally agree with Kant about the disinterestedness of aesthetic judgement.

User avatar
Conde Lucanor
Posts: 673
Joined: Mon Nov 04, 2013 2:59 am

Re: Emotions and Judgment

Post by Conde Lucanor » Sat Oct 29, 2016 3:57 am

Hobbes' Choice wrote:Personally I feel that Art has been so bloody disgraceful since The Fountain, that people have felt more free to apply the word to the things they do, rather than things that have lofty value. There can be art in cooking, talking, driving etc.. Art is democratized.
For me, what deserved to called "art", which belonged to that long period between the Renaissance and the avant-garde movements of early 20th century, is no longer alive. What is left of the heroic period of art is something that people may still call art, for which there will be art galleries and museums, curators, lectures and cultural events celebrating and reaffirming its value for society, but is actually something that stands over a dead corpse. There will always be talented people, but their skillful energies will be channeled through the crafts and industrial design. The ones without talent will commit to conceptual art, I think.

User avatar
Hobbes' Choice
Posts: 8385
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2013 11:45 am

Re: Emotions and Judgment

Post by Hobbes' Choice » Sat Oct 29, 2016 11:11 am

Conde Lucanor wrote:
Hobbes' Choice wrote:Personally I feel that Art has been so bloody disgraceful since The Fountain, that people have felt more free to apply the word to the things they do, rather than things that have lofty value. There can be art in cooking, talking, driving etc.. Art is democratized.
For me, what deserved to called "art", which belonged to that long period between the Renaissance and the avant-garde movements of early 20th century, is no longer alive. What is left of the heroic period of art is something that people may still call art, for which there will be art galleries and museums, curators, lectures and cultural events celebrating and reaffirming its value for society, but is actually something that stands over a dead corpse. There will always be talented people, but their skillful energies will be channeled through the crafts and industrial design. The ones without talent will commit to conceptual art, I think.
I do not think, even the established "Art" of the Renaissance will ever die, as well crafted objects of sculpture and skilfully made paintings will always have the ability to amaze and get emotional reactions.
It's the fly-by-night conceptual art is is tomorrow's rubbish.
And I agree, those without skill, or just lazy artists, tend towards the conceptual. It is common enough for a modern established artist, to have an idea, and then get a real artist to make the work for him.
But all art has concepts, as well as craft. It just about balance.

I think this will always be held in the highest regard for many reasons. Though it is rough, and primitive I'd place it higher than a 100 coneptualists.
Image
By contrast The Fountain, is one concept with the most minimal possible craft; signing it R. Mutt took almost no skill.
There are concepts here, but there is also skill.

User avatar
TSBU
Posts: 825
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2016 5:46 pm

Re: Emotions and Judgment

Post by TSBU » Sat Oct 29, 2016 2:43 pm

I just d what i like, and enjoy what i like, i dont care about history, sociology, crapology, etc.

Every painting technique willbe improved, by science, no human can be better than a computer when it comes to play an instrument, every piece of music willbe forgotten, but i just enjoy them. Oh, who the hell mind who where the people playing mozart? What painter makes his own pigemtns nowaday? Who cares if the David is original or not? Who cares if a novel has good description etc, when all you are going to remember are just abstractions and simplifications?

Well, some people. I dont. Bethoven didnt play his piano probably, since he was deaf, nah, he wasnt an artist...

Who cares what is art and what is an artist? I just enjoy music.

Movies? Wo cares how is the camera moving, in a couple of years it will be 3d. BUt the plot... nah, guinists are not artists.

Etc.

User avatar
Conde Lucanor
Posts: 673
Joined: Mon Nov 04, 2013 2:59 am

Re: Emotions and Judgment

Post by Conde Lucanor » Sun Oct 30, 2016 1:18 am

Hobbes' Choice wrote:I do not think, even the established "Art" of the Renaissance will ever die, as well crafted objects of sculpture and skilfully made paintings will always have the ability to amaze and get emotional reactions.
I believe so and that's what I meant, although I still put less emphasis on getting emotional reactions. It's good art, regardless of that.
Hobbes' Choice wrote:It's the fly-by-night conceptual art is is tomorrow's rubbish.
And I agree, those without skill, or just lazy artists, tend towards the conceptual. It is common enough for a modern established artist, to have an idea, and then get a real artist to make the work for him.
But all art has concepts, as well as craft. It just about balance.
I have a problem with the whole current institution of art itself, I mean the galleries, art dealers, the coffee table books, the new artists, the curators, lectures, and so on. I have some friends artists and a lot of friends which regard this dimension in their lives as a sign of their compromise with a better society and a profound intellect. I think they are posers and full of BS. A very important element is missing in this world: the art critic. I mean the scholarly, erudite art critic as it used to be. Now any amateur dilettante gets the job.
Hobbes' Choice wrote:I think this will always be held in the highest regard for many reasons. Though it is rough, and primitive I'd place it higher than a 100 coneptualists.
Image
By contrast The Fountain, is one concept with the most minimal possible craft; signing it R. Mutt took almost no skill.
There are concepts here, but there is also skill.
I think Duchamp's urinal was a very important statement in the history of art, as it was Malevich's Black Square and much of the avant-garde movement. That, of course, in relation to the social and cultural context of the time. Submitting an urinal now, or any other pretension of scandal, as has become common in the art establishment, is a futile and pointless act. And so is redoing abstract art and stuff that was revolutionary 100 years ago.

User avatar
Conde Lucanor
Posts: 673
Joined: Mon Nov 04, 2013 2:59 am

Re: Emotions and Judgment

Post by Conde Lucanor » Sun Oct 30, 2016 1:28 am

TSBU wrote:I just d what i like, and enjoy what i like, i dont care about history, sociology, crapology, etc.

Every painting technique willbe improved, by science, no human can be better than a computer when it comes to play an instrument, every piece of music willbe forgotten, but i just enjoy them. Oh, who the hell mind who where the people playing mozart? What painter makes his own pigemtns nowaday? Who cares if the David is original or not? Who cares if a novel has good description etc, when all you are going to remember are just abstractions and simplifications?

Well, some people. I dont. Bethoven didnt play his piano probably, since he was deaf, nah, he wasnt an artist...

Who cares what is art and what is an artist? I just enjoy music.

Movies? Wo cares how is the camera moving, in a couple of years it will be 3d. BUt the plot... nah, guinists are not artists.

Etc.
Many people wander around the streets absolutely indifferent of why things are as they are and completely detached of the thought of whether they could be different. They just live the moment and they're absolutely entitled to do so, it's their own life and they can do whatever they want. Some other people are more curious to know what's behind everything they experience. And well...they are entitled to do so, too.

User avatar
TSBU
Posts: 825
Joined: Wed Sep 14, 2016 5:46 pm

Re: Emotions and Judgment

Post by TSBU » Sun Oct 30, 2016 9:08 am

Conde Lucanor wrote:
TSBU wrote:I just d what i like, and enjoy what i like, i dont care about history, sociology, crapology, etc.

Every painting technique willbe improved, by science, no human can be better than a computer when it comes to play an instrument, every piece of music willbe forgotten, but i just enjoy them. Oh, who the hell mind who where the people playing mozart? What painter makes his own pigemtns nowaday? Who cares if the David is original or not? Who cares if a novel has good description etc, when all you are going to remember are just abstractions and simplifications?

Well, some people. I dont. Bethoven didnt play his piano probably, since he was deaf, nah, he wasnt an artist...

Who cares what is art and what is an artist? I just enjoy music.

Movies? Wo cares how is the camera moving, in a couple of years it will be 3d. BUt the plot... nah, guinists are not artists.

Etc.
Many people wander around the streets absolutely indifferent of why things are as they are and completely detached of the thought of whether they could be different. They just live the moment and they're absolutely entitled to do so, it's their own life and they can do whatever they want. Some other people are more curious to know what's behind everything they experience. And well...they are entitled to do so, too.

Believe me, I'm not in the first group. He was a lier etc, but, as an example, it's said that Freud didn't like music, because he "couldn't understand it", in music, in art, etc, most of emotions have no meanings, why a melody cause anger and other cause sadness? I've rejected many people in my life cause they weren't perfect (specially from an ethical point of view), I've rejected many things to do in my own life cause they weren't perfect. What is "perfect"? there is no such thing here.
Every time I listen to ANY kind of music, I miss something in the piece.
But I still like art. Lazy art? where is the limit?
Anyway, when I look at "why" in art, I look in myself, or the artist. A technique can be a piece of shit for some piece of arts, and it can be great for others. I generally like or dislike some things in books, music, painting, etc, but when you want to express a feeling or cause it, to tell a story etc... sometimes it's better to do it the other way, and that doesn't turn your job in "bad art", t's good if it's good for my feelings. And I look deeply in things: so deeply, that I don't care about "sociology" or things like that, that's not an explanation. You can try all you want to fit in a "school", but a "true artist" for me, is the one who give the seed for the job.
I've enjoyed many "simple" books, quick books, with no detailed plot, because I liked what the writter wanted to express, and there were no need to to a big book. It's the same with every piece of art, say that they are not "true artist", cause they may choose an expert in a technique to do some things, is like saying that the people who make new algorithms are "just designers" and people who code with them are "true artists".
Whateva, I'm a lazy, maybe. And I enjoy music.

If you play chess, you win if you win. You may know a lot, or nothing, if you don't know anything, you'll probably lose. But if you want the "absolute plan to play chess", the "absolute description of a good play", that's impossible. If you center in talking about tech, it can reach a point when you call a bad player to one who always win XD.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hYCJJWd-MMA

User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 1488
Joined: Wed Aug 03, 2016 7:18 pm
Location: NYC Man

Re: Emotions and Judgment

Post by Terrapin Station » Sun Oct 30, 2016 12:13 pm

Conde Lucanor wrote:Maybe, but as Kant well put it, aesthetic judgement implies a notion of universality,
One of the many things that Kant said that he was completely wrong about in my opinion.
When judging aesthetically, one behaves AS IF the object had the esteemed properties.
That's only the case for those enchanted by the mistaken belief of objectivity (re aesthetics) or those kowtowing to those enchanted by that mistaken belief.
Also, one could determine the current state of an artistic practice, with its known stylistic codes, compare it with new works that divert from the canon and come up with a pretty objective assessment of the gap between one and the other.
You could talk about objective differences in things like paint handling, color selection, figure and line tendencies, etc., but none of that is an aesthetic judgment. There is no way to attain any objectivity with respect to aesthetic judgments.
You can give a value to that difference as manifestation of a creative process.
Which would be completely subjective.

Terrapin Station wrote:The notion of artistic versus non-artistic semantic content seems dubious though.
Not really.
It doesn't really seem dubious to me? Hahaha.
You can find semantic content in a newspaper headline,
If you're talking about where the semantic content is located, it's in your head.

If you're simply saying that one can have semantic responses to both things that one considers an artwork and things that one does not, that I'd agree with.

However, based on your comments, you believe that semantic content is somehow contained in the objects at hand. That belief is mistaken.
As Marx said:
You like quoting people who said a lot of shit that's completely wrong. ;-)
Well, no.
Is too.
There are distinctive artistic practices, ideologies, formal codes applied to composition and performance. You can compare among the works of any discipline and make objective assessments of them.
None of that stuff, none of those assessments are evaluative, none are aesthetic assessments, etc. without simply being some individuals' preferences, their feelings of like versus dislike.
If one is focused on artistic achievement, one can easily forget the other "lot of stuff". And the opposite is also true: you can focus on the other non-artistic stuff and forget there's an artistic intention behind it.
When I write "any judgment necessarily involves a lot of stuff that doesn't have anything to do with works of art" I don't use the word "necessarily" just because I think it's a pretty decoration or something. So obviously I disagree with you.

Terrapin Station wrote:And not all artistic assesment is about likes or dislikes.
It is when we make any kind of evaluative judgment a la good, bad, better, worse, sublime, crass, beautiful, repulsive, etc. etc.
I generally agree with Kant about the disinterestedness of aesthetic judgement.
I honestly don't recall agreeing with Kant on anything but the most trivial comments he's made.

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests