Splitting hairs upon what is art (Not for the faint of heart)

No seriously posting this to be open minded, but without anyone needing their feelings hurt. I intend this to be “safe art,” so no need to discuss NSFW.

My input
I firmly believe one should reflect on themselves and those around them. If art does not express something deep in the above then its not art. Same goes for writing.

The English language I speak even carries verbages I have ecperienced or have grown accustomed to. If the artist themselves cannot see something in their art of themselves then its not art.

Which is why I find things like AI-art, splattered paint, and stained wood grain difficult to be considered art. Not that they can’t be, but rather in of itself is not art by the artist themselves.

–ie I build instruments out of wood. Yet, apply my art to them or make art with their structure.–

I’m wondering if art isn’t actually defined by the numerous debates around its definition, just like Bitcoin is defined by the full history of all transactions that took place. Nobody has the same definition of art.

People will then draw classical pieces, picnic scenes with paint splotches, tip some urinals or tap a banana to the wall, and maybe generating one of two half-broken IA pictures, and then show the result to as much people as possible while screaming “THIS is ART”

As long as it’s driven by burning passion, and a real intent of creating something you’d be proud of, whatever you’re creating is Art. Whether people will like it or not is another thing…

For me, a more important question is “why are you asking if it’s art?”

Because “Is or Isn’t Art” is a question which is deeply fraught.

As with David J. Slater’s case, when a monkey grabbed his camera and took a selfie, is the resulting image art? Or not? Too often the definition of art requires the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination. So selfies taken by monkeys and paintings painted by elephants are usually “Not Art”, simply by definition and regardless of their quality or merit.

And in the same way, as we all saw with the recent debate over AI generated images and the rights of people prompting them, that lack of a human in the actual creation of the piece renders it “Not Art” for all practical purposes.

They’re like the sunrise or the sky at night - art they “Art”? Or merely “Beautiful”?

So, this for me is why it’s better to ask “Why are you asking if it is art?”

That, for me, gets to the heart of what the piece does to use personally. And, for what I kind of consider ‘high art’, the goal and purpose of art is to ask questions. If the work doesn’t raise questions or doubt, then is it really art? Or is it craft?

As you work with instruments, the same thing can be asked.

Is a Jean Larrivée D-03R Rosewood guitar art? Or craft?

I think anyone who ever was blessed by the opportunity to play one would immediately say it is very well crafted. But, for me, if the instrument goes further and forces you to question your own experience with similar guitars, to ask yourself if you really understand the sounds that you are making and how your hands and the instrument interact, then it is also art. The experience of playing it, the only true way to completely experience it, can open up entire new plateaus of understanding within yourself and force you to question what you thought you knew about guitars and performance.

But for someone experienced in instruments of even higher quality (and there are many such instruments) then maybe that Jean Larrivée is merely craft. Because the “Art” is in the experience of it. It is not inherent in the piece itself.

So, for me at least, the question of ‘is it art’ looks at the viewer, or the person experiencing the art. Does it move them? Do they ask new questions of themselves or reality? Is it transformative or decisive?

And independent of a viewer, and audience, is a thing capable of being “Art”? Is an ancient statue buried in a jungle “Art” before someone uncovers it?

In the same way, most of Charlie Chaplin’s works were very well crafted. But “The Dictator” was, for me at least, art. It still presents common themes and tropes in such fascinating and intertwined and in some ways incongruities ways that absolutely can break the expectations of those who first encounter it.

Art.

But, for the practical purpose on this site, “Art” is simply something someone made with their own hands. Even a stick figure drawn with crayon will qualify someone for an Artist Badge here. And some of the stick figures people have drawn here have absolutely been what I would call “Art”.

I mean, heck - one of my favorite artists here is Weaver:

Anyway, how you answer whether you make art yourself or not is entirely up to you.

For me, if someone buys “Art” from me, like metal work or a weapon, I make “Art”. I put it on a velvet pad and present it on a plinth with proper lighting because they came to me asking for “Art”. If they pay for “Art”, then they get “Art”.

And if they buy a “Tool” or a “Knife” I make them a “Tool” or a “Knife”. Same thing for “Drawings” or “Logos”.

I don’t care what it’s called - for me it’s the same experience either way. Hours of deeply contemplative joy followed by no memory whatsoever of what happened and look - there’s a tool or a blade or a piece of paper with something drawn on it. Woo!

What it becomes after that is up to the person its for. And if its just a gallery piece, then I stand on the far side of the room and wait for opening night to find out if it’s art or craft or something entirely else.

Reminds me of Norman Rockwell. When they were asked if they were an artist, or an illustrator, they responded: