Exactly. Thus the graphic artist who had the Campbell's soup contract and designed the tomato soup label was likely not going for emotional impact (for himself or shoppers), however Andy Warhol almost certainly was.nemos wrote: ↑Tue Dec 19, 2023 7:35 pmSo it can be said that art is a means of expression to address someone through feelings and emotions, and as a response to such an address there should also be a reaction through feelings and emotions so that such an address could be considered successful.
This could be a good starting point for further discussions about art.
For instance:
The work was created technically, but without an emotional appeal, even if the "viewer" had one for reasons only known to him?
Or if the artist created work only for himself, without trying to appeal to anyone else?
Or if a person with a distinctly artistic inner world was too lazy to learn the craft, and therefore his works are not always able to win the heart of the "viewer".
Art
Re: Art
Re: Art
Hypothesis:
- Billie Holiday, Miles Davis, Chet Baker, even Dianna Ross … they’ve all got that super-relaxed sound.
- The talent was not their relaxation and how they got it.
- Their talent was not even in communicating what they felt, which was obviously relaxed.
- Their talent was in making the witness feel, what the witness felt.
- Bingo. That’s the definitive “artistic” quality to be found in any work, if it’s there to be found.
- Not relaxed, that’s not the quality, although that’s a good quality if appropriate.
- Making the witness of the art feel something specific, and intended by the artist for the witness to feel, that’s the quality that defines an artistic work. For example, Picasso’s Guernica.
- Methods to achieve this are found in the various fields of art, including literature and performance.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m1XHz7d ... LC&index=2