Red iceberg

[Blood Jester]

How isn't this art?

What definition of art are the people who are denying it is art using?

It is the purest and highest form of art, altering your environment with available materials for entertainment or aesthetic pleasure.

Saying you don't like it is perfectly valid, saying you think it is silly is perfectly valid- but saying it isn't art is crossibng a line, imho, that says you do not know enough about art to be stating an opinion.

Anyone can have or state an opinion, and 'art' is partially in the perception. And I respect you more than to think you really meant that as badly as it came out.

Having grown up the child of a professional artist (i.e. made a living off of artistic works, degree was in fine arts) and being related to several others, I was taught to appreciate art in many forms. That said... Why don't I call this art?

Same reason that, regardless of talent (which this does not display) I don't call other acts of vandalism 'art'. And I've seen plenty of graffiti growing up that displayed actual artistic talent. Throwing paint on natural wonders is just defacing them. Or would you like to see someone do a kinetic sculpture by setting the redwood forest on fire? (Not meant as snarky as that sounds)

He (the 'artist') says "Nature...belongs to all (of) us" I'm glad he asked the rest of 'us' when he spray painted 'our' front lawn.

edit: typo.

 

[ASH]

How isn't this art?

What definition of art are the people who are denying it is art using?

It is the purest and highest form of art, altering your environment with available materials for entertainment or aesthetic pleasure.

Saying you don't like it is perfectly valid, saying you think it is silly is perfectly valid- but saying it isn't art is crossibng a line, imho, that says you do not know enough about art to be stating an opinion.

Okay, i will conceed. Art is, in my humble opinion, an expression of self. So, yes this can be called art. The picture looks almost like someone just photoshopped it red. But, perhaps had I been on location to the actual coloring of the iceburg, it could have been spectacular. I mean the concept sounds kind of cool. A sea of white ice, and in the middle a red one.. i see how it could be pretty.
But the pic did not do it any justice.. But I will take back my statment, it is kind of pig headed to state that I dont think its art. I do still find it a bit out there though..

 

[Mark]

How isn't this art?

What definition of art are the people who are denying it is art using?

It is the purest and highest form of art, altering your environment with available materials for entertainment or aesthetic pleasure.

Saying you don't like it is perfectly valid, saying you think it is silly is perfectly valid- but saying it isn't art is crossibng a line, imho, that says you do not know enough about art to be stating an opinion.

Then, perhaps, you don't know enough about opinions...?

Anyone can say anything, and in my case I don't think that this is art, either. And I am not condemning and entire style or movement. I am talking about this particular piece. I think his goldfish exhibit was a great piece of art. It challenged the viewer to make a fundemental choice regarding their own existence in relation to the world at large and other life.

On the other hand, I would say that this is art if he had slavishly, over many, many years, squirreled away his own blood to paint the iceberg...but, perhaps, that's just me.

 

[Blood Jester]

On the other hand, I would say that this is art if he had slavishly, over many, many years, squirreled away his own blood to paint the iceberg...but, perhaps, that's just me.

You, Sir, are a visionary!

 

[alsih2o]

Then, perhaps, you don't know enough about opinions...?

Anyone can say anything....

Opinions are opinions, and any opinion is valid, but I find a great deal of difference in saying something is bad art and saying it isn't art.

Take as an example playing basketball. I am HORRID, I mean bad like old fish. I have trouble dribbling and walking and i shoot very poorly. Consequently no coach would want me on their team and no captain would pick me.. it is sad really. But the point is you cannot really say what i am doing is "not basketball."

Does that make sense? I mean, you can say it is bad, trashy, irresponsible, tacky, boring, obvious, poorly executed, lacking in taste and offensive to the general senses- but I do not think anyone has the authority to say it isn't art.

A clumsy dancer is still a dancer. A boring actor is still acting. Poorly cooked asparagus is still asparagus and bad art is still art.

 

[Blood Jester]

Opinions are opinions, and any opinion is valid, but I find a great deal of difference in saying something is bad art and saying it isn't art.

Take as an example playing basketball. I am HORRID, I mean bad like old fish. I have trouble dribbling and walking and i shoot very poorly. Consequently no coach would want me on their team and no captain would pick me.. it is sad really. But the point is you cannot really say what i am doing is "not basketball."

Does that make sense? I mean, you can say it is bad, trashy, irresponsible, tacky, boring, obvious, poorly executed, lacking in taste and offensive to the general senses- but I do not think anyone has the authority to say it isn't art.

A clumsy dancer is still a dancer. A boring actor is still acting. Poorly cooked asparagus is still asparagus and bad art is still art.

But if you picked up the basketball, ran to first base, and beaned the pee-wee leaguer standing there, then I definitely could say, 'You are not playing Basketball.'

 

[Mark]

Opinions are opinions, and any opinion is valid, but I find a great deal of difference in saying something is bad art and saying it isn't art.

You're entitled to that opinion.

Take as an example playing basketball. I am HORRID, I mean bad like old fish. I have trouble dribbling and walking and i shoot very poorly. Consequently no coach would want me on their team and no captain would pick me.. it is sad really. But the point is you cannot really say what i am doing is "not basketball."

"I" cannot really say that? You'd be surprized what "I" can say.

Does that make sense? I mean, you can say it is bad, trashy, irresponsible, tacky, boring, obvious, poorly executed, lacking in taste and offensive to the general senses- but I do not think anyone has the authority to say it isn't art.

They can have the right to say something without having the authority to lend their opinion weight.

A clumsy dancer is still a dancer. A boring actor is still acting. Poorly cooked asparagus is still asparagus and bad art is still art.

Not necessarily. When something is produced that is meant to be subjectified by "others" it is up to the "others" to determine its nature. The only one of your examples that rings true to me is the one regarding asparagus, but that's not a subjective matter in my opinion.

 

[LightPhoenix]

Sorry, but I don't consider this art at all. Any idiot can go an paint an iceberg red, or crap in a paper bag, or throw paint at a canvas haphazardly. I can do that. Just because you call something art doesn't make it true, any more than saying you're playing basketball when you can't dribble and you can't shoot. More so because art isn't tangible like basketball is.

Anyway, art (and music, which I am more intimate with) is entirely contingent on the person viewing it, in my opinion. So for that reason, what is and isn't art is completely subjective anyway. I look at the deer running outside my window and consider that art, so...

 

[Hand of Evil]

Guys, please.

I never meant for this to turn into a debate over art. I just dislike the artist, he is all about shock and being outrageous not about beauty and pleasure.

 

[Tarrasque Wrangler]

Well HoE, not to sound patronizing, but not all art is there to make you feel better. Go take a look at Picasso's Guernica sometime.