Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dannyalcatraz" data-source="post: 5644442" data-attributes="member: 19675">In no particular order:Clearly, you have not understood my posts.I have repeatedly said things like "defining art is like defining god, so I won't try," "art is subjective," "what is art to some may not be art to most" and even that "under the right conditions, playing D&D could be art, but it has to involve something more than just the intent to play the game.IOW, what you claim is not my position is exactly the position I've been espousing the entire damn thread.Given that art is subjective, it thus follows that what you consider art may include things I will deny are art.  That's the nature of subjectivity.  And again, please note that I said it was possible to use D&D as an artistic medium, but that I have never seen it used that way...which means there has been no "categorical denial."You still missed that the "specific intent to create art" qualifier IS in that article- also from the wiki:andAndThe difference between Mark Rothko painting my wall a particular color & pattern in his style and Joe Refurbisher painting my wall the exact same way is that Mark Rothko is intentionally creating an artistic statement.They are using the same medium- paintapplied to a flat surface- but with entirely different intents.  Joe wants to paint the wall in a particular way to make his client happy and get paid.  Mark is trying to tell us something, so he is using the medium to do more than it's basic function. Likewise, D&D's basic function is to formalize the game of pretend.  If what you do when you sit down to play the game of D&D is play a formalized game of pretend of D&D rules, then that is all you are doing-  no art is generated.If, OTOH, you and your group decide to trancend the boundaries of a game of pretend and deliver a message- say...dealing with the recent debt ceiling limit debate in the USA- then you've probably created a piece of performance art.Consider this: there have been a few cases in which people have tried to get stripper dancing and other kinds of public nudity to be considered free speech and/or legitimate, protected works of art.  The courts, in evaluating their claims, look to see if anything besides the erotic stimulation of viewers in exchange for $$$- stripper dancing's primary purpose- is going on.The movants haven't done all that well...but no court has said it was impossible for an ecdysiast to have a performance that transcends mere stripping.</blockquote>

Verification