Do you have a strict idea for what is "art" and what isn't? In order words, do you have a border for what you consider "art" and what you consider "non-art"?
|126 votes
Yes, I have an idea on what is art and what isn't.
41%
Nope.
59%
SpitfiresOnIce's avatar
By SpitfiresOnIce   |   Watch
83
Published: October 11, 2014
Comments83
anonymous's avatar
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Sign In
zooIogy's avatar
zooIogyHobbyist Digital Artist
Yeah. It's not a super strict definition but:
The "art" in question cannot be made for a single, express purpose that isn't decoration/viewing. (ie. a normal toilet is not art because its sole purpose is an actual use and it hasn't dually been designed with outstanding visual design in mind... whether or not you take it out of its room and stick it in a museum, it's still a toilet. Sorry Marcel Duchamp but I think you and your urinal are dumb and not-art.)

Something with an actual use but which was designed specifically to be outstanding or excessively different from the normal use-only designs will count as art though (ie. if you decide to paint that toilet to look like Pikachu, then I'll call it art).
SpitfiresOnIce's avatar
SpitfiresOnIceHobbyist Digital Artist
Poor Duchamp though.
Then again, a lot of the ancient object in museums that we call "art" would no longer be art according to that definition.
Roxalew's avatar
RoxalewHobbyist Digital Artist
Art: EVERYTHING :iconiloveitplz: :D
SpitfiresOnIce's avatar
SpitfiresOnIceHobbyist Digital Artist
Haha, pretty much ;D
Roxalew's avatar
RoxalewHobbyist Digital Artist
:iconexplodelaplz: :D GLAD YOU AGREEEEEEEEE!
SpitfiresOnIce's avatar
SpitfiresOnIceHobbyist Digital Artist
Of course :la:
Sorrelheart's avatar
SorrelheartStudent Filmographer
I mean I'm not trying to hate on his art just

why couldn't I have done that
SpitfiresOnIce's avatar
SpitfiresOnIceHobbyist Digital Artist
I know that feeling!
Sorrelheart's avatar
SorrelheartStudent Filmographer
Sometimes I want to say I don't have strict limits but then I look at Lucio Fontana's paintings(google it)
SpitfiresOnIce's avatar
SpitfiresOnIceHobbyist Digital Artist
Oh :XD:
ThePsychoDog's avatar
ThePsychoDogHobbyist Digital Artist
Art to me comes from the heart and mind. As long as I see a hint of both put into a piece of artwork, I will like it. If I see greed and/or no love put into the piece, I will despise both the artist and his/her art. Because why work or study something you do not put have passion for, "to make a living?" oh, shut up! I am not saying you can't make a living off of it, I am saying "why do it if you do not even put any passion to it?" You know what I'm saying?
SpitfiresOnIce's avatar
SpitfiresOnIceHobbyist Digital Artist
Yea, I see owo
LightMistOcean's avatar
LightMistOceanHobbyist Digital Artist
Art is pretty much the expression of creativity. I don't think there is a true definition to it, it depends on everyone's opinion
SpitfiresOnIce's avatar
SpitfiresOnIceHobbyist Digital Artist
Yea, true I guess owo
jack-the-awe5ome's avatar
I believe art to be border less considering it's definition "the expression or application of human creativity or imagination to produce works primarily to be appreciated for their beauty or emotional power" And since beauty is in the eye of the beholder, I believe anything can be art to someone.
However in saying this, the definition also says "using application of human creativity or imagination" and like one of the older comments read, paintings that look like a five year old drew them, I believe should not be held on such a level they are. I mean I once saw a "3d painting" that was just a red show glued to cardboard and that sold for 3.8m? I can't be the only one (and I see that im not which is great) that thinks that's absurd. It's things like that that annoy me, someone paints a masterpiece and another chucks paint at some thing and the latter is bought cause it's "avante Garde" that's insane
SpitfiresOnIce's avatar
SpitfiresOnIceHobbyist Digital Artist
It sure is absurd in a way, and I guess it's something I will never really understand :P
Nitteh's avatar
NittehStudent Digital Artist
Anything can be art, but seriously, something that actually looks good. My 7-year old brother's horrible drawings cannot be considered art. But I don't know if the autist's drawings I showed are considered art.
SpitfiresOnIce's avatar
SpitfiresOnIceHobbyist Digital Artist
Then again, what looks good and what not depends on the viewer too xD
Geinlu's avatar
GeinluHobbyist Traditional Artist
Everything shall now be art!!!Rabbit's here! 
SpitfiresOnIce's avatar
SpitfiresOnIceHobbyist Digital Artist
:XD: Easiest way to solve it.
KittyKatWarrior's avatar
KittyKatWarriorHobbyist Digital Artist
I put no but there are some things that shouldn't be considered art. Like at art competitions when there is like huge canvases then like one blob of paint I'm just like -.- . U being srs rn
SpitfiresOnIce's avatar
SpitfiresOnIceHobbyist Digital Artist
:XD: I see :P
AkaPanuka's avatar
AkaPanukaHobbyist Digital Artist
I guess in a general sense, I pretty much consider what anyone creates as art, but there are times I come across those things that really make me wonder. One time, my art teacher was showing me pieces that won certain art competitions (like, really big ones). One of the pictures literally looked like a 5 year old's drawing, and this isn't the first time I've seen something like that. It kinda stumps me when I see weird things like that, I mean, it has been considered 'high quality art' more than once, I guess at first glance I am like, "How can that win something so prestigious?" but it kinda makes you think, you know?
SpitfiresOnIce's avatar
SpitfiresOnIceHobbyist Digital Artist
I see it often, and it does make you think for sure. xD Nowadays I'm all, eh, I'm not bothered by it anymore because I guess I just don't understand what art is about :XD:
anonymous's avatar
Join the community to add your comment. Already a deviant? Sign In
©2019 DeviantArt
All Rights reserved