October 24, 2010 History AP Mr. Mettee Hallie Veteto
This article defines art beyond our major modern distinctions of fine art vs. craft. It includes everything found “in pursuit of his needs, luxury, amusement, satisfaction of curiosity” etc. This conceptualization of art includes practically everything, practical, aesthetic or otherwise. While it’s very poetic to say everything is art and art is everything, it’s not very helpful in a concrete sense. A single dictionary these days has from 15-25 definitions of art. Perhaps the one that is best is the one that combines this poetic sentiment with a more tangible definition, saying art is the quality, production, expression, or realm, according to aesthetic principles, of what is beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance”. Art simply isn’t everything, art is subjective by nature. It is what’s pleasing, beautiful, or entertaining in a way that is beyond the scope of ‘interesting’. Art is an abused word, in that respect. People are willing to call anything interesting art, and while they have the right to do that, because art is subjective, it defeats the purpose of art being held to a different standard. No matter what the definition of art some will always feel more qualified to define art than others, because everything that is subjective is also susceptible to snobbery and being swallowed up by the self-absorbed. The article does say rightly “man is only the minister or interpreter of nature: he can only understand or act insofar as he has knowledge of the beings that surround him, either by means of experiment or reflection, “ which is why some feel so inclined to define themselves as connoisseurs.
History AP
Mr. Mettee
Hallie Veteto
This article defines art beyond our major modern distinctions of fine art vs. craft. It includes everything found “in pursuit of his needs, luxury, amusement, satisfaction of curiosity” etc. This conceptualization of art includes practically everything, practical, aesthetic or otherwise. While it’s very poetic to say everything is art and art is everything, it’s not very helpful in a concrete sense. A single dictionary these days has from 15-25 definitions of art. Perhaps the one that is best is the one that combines this poetic sentiment with a more tangible definition, saying art is the quality, production, expression, or realm, according to aesthetic principles, of what is beautiful, appealing, or of more than ordinary significance”. Art simply isn’t everything, art is subjective by nature. It is what’s pleasing, beautiful, or entertaining in a way that is beyond the scope of ‘interesting’. Art is an abused word, in that respect. People are willing to call anything interesting art, and while they have the right to do that, because art is subjective, it defeats the purpose of art being held to a different standard. No matter what the definition of art some will always feel more qualified to define art than others, because everything that is subjective is also susceptible to snobbery and being swallowed up by the self-absorbed. The article does say rightly “man is only the minister or interpreter of nature: he can only understand or act insofar as he has knowledge of the beings that surround him, either by means of experiment or reflection, “ which is why some feel so inclined to define themselves as connoisseurs.