The Cubicle Chronicles

Monday, October 10, 2005

To where "Art" can go?

Since the dawn of man there has been art.

Hell, some may argue that man is art.

From the moment man tried to communicate with his fellow men he's been trying to satisfy that instinctual drive to express himself.

What is "art" anyway?

According to Dictionary.com, "Art" is:
  1. The conscious production or arrangement of sounds, colors, forms, movements, or other elements in a manner that affects the sense of beauty, specifically the production of the beautiful in a graphic or plastic medium.
  2. High quality of conception or execution, as found in works of beauty; aesthetic value.
  3. A field or category of art, such as music, ballet, or literature.
  4. A nonscientific branch of learning; one of the liberal arts.
  5. Skill that is attained by study, practice, or observation: the art of the baker; the blacksmith's art.

In a nutshell, the "Art" I’m addressing today is that of a conscious production or arrangement of stimulus relating to our five natural senses, and is ascribed by those who perceive it as having an "innovative/creative" value and/or aesthetic quality.


(Granted, we could argue all day over "what" and "who" decides what art is, but that's not the issue I'm looking to explore.)


Rather, I'm interested in finding out where you think art is going in terms of the quality of modern artists, the mediums that artists will be using in the future, as well as if you feel art is evolving, and if so, into what?


Throughout time there has been music, food, dance, writing, painting, photography, sculpture, to list just a very few mediums of creative expression.

The point is they all stimulate one or more senses. What may be the next medium in "art"?

Are we, like some critics say "on the dusk of the renaissance"? Is "art" dead?
Have we done all there is to do with it?

Does the world even appreciate art anymore, or is it just archaic entertainment surpassed by the stimulus of television and the electronic age?

Get some coffee and then hit us with the mad wisdom!

posted by Don the "Head Chimp" at 12:00 AM

16 Comments:

  • Art is too broad a category. Subway employees are known as "Sandwich Artists", for Chrissakes.
    I think the art of the future will be done on the moon. By robots.
    Doing body piercing.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:11 PM  

  • Arts is simply a projection of creative thought using the tools and materials available to man at any time.

    As the tools we use change and the types of materials we use change... so too will art.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 7:57 PM  

  • What I did this morning in the toilet some might consider art

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9:40 AM  

  • True poop can be considered art, however the placement of said poop must be carefully considered. If it was placed between russia and alaska then it could be considered a faux land bridge and be art. However in your toilet, that is really just common place and not really art.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9:54 AM  

  • But a picture of your toilet could be considered art.

    By Blogger D a n i e l, at 10:49 AM  

  • Art is no longer relegated to a wall art is now a weapon in the arsenal of corporations! "The man" uses art to influence you; they (the man's henchmen) kidnapped Wharhol to influence future generations to market products for free! Don't you see art is simply a shell to transport an idea, before common language people would draw themselves killing things like buffalo, all they were trying to convey was "kill buffalo it taste good!" Soon after that they figured out that if they fence off the buffalo they can call it theres and sell it to other people. What i am trying to say is that artists are dip shits, they are a people who's product rely's on another persons ability to pay ridiculous sums on a piece of fabric to hang on the wall. Artists hate corporations but without the rich affluent motherfuckers at the heads of these companies no one could afford there "statement".

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 12:48 PM  

  • Interesting perspective... I would argue that artists may have a variety of motivations for creating a piece of work (i.e. money, therapeutic release, communicate an idea through another medium, challenge, etc.)

    I'm not so sure that "artists are dipshits". At most, an artist may be ego-centric, selfish, idealistic, or just enjoy the creation aspect of art.

    If you've ever heard of the phrase, "starving artist", you would know that artists in general, do not make much money at all; therefore, it logically doesn't make sense to think that they're all doing it for the money.

    I guess your comment begs the question, "does the reasoning/intention add to, or detract from the quality and value of the art in question?"

    For example, is an advertisment for a Jaguar art? how about compared with a Van Gogh? Is one more valued over the other, and why?

    The whole government conspiracy shit is just that, "a load of shit." I'm not even going to address such an idiotic suggestion.

    By Blogger Don the "Head Chimp", at 1:41 PM  

  • Wow I'm going to bet 5 bux that e coli couldn't:

    A. Draw a straight line with a ruler

    B. Carry a tune in a paper bag

    C. find the one with either foot

    D. Portray a feeling other than the one he/she is currently feeling

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:02 PM  

  • If someone says something about conspiracies or "the Man" one more time; I am going to do things that one might consider art with someone's innards.
    E coli spelled Warhol's name wrong.
    Yeah. He knows a LOT about art.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 1:28 AM  

  • Spelling Bei

    Ahh, let us take caution Mr. Burnz (a.k.a., "your mother said..."), shithead isn't the only one who has a problem with spelling...

    However, I guess it's twice as bad when you can't spell, and have nothing really enlightening to say.

    By Blogger Don the "Head Chimp", at 8:02 AM  

  • Ya, I didn't write that. I would never say anything about someone else's spelling as I can barely spell my own name. Also I dropped the your mom bit a while ago. Ok it was not that long ago but still I didn't write it.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 9:56 AM  

  • My apologies for the false accusations...

    ;-)

    By Blogger Don the "Head Chimp", at 11:25 AM  

  • Good Call Such!

    Exactely what I was getting at; "where is art going in regards to our mediums, styles, etc.?" (i.e. more computers: more computer-based art. more emphasis on consumerism: more advertising "art" etc.)

    By Blogger Don the "Head Chimp", at 4:22 PM  

  • Hey, gentlemen. I am a good speller. I was angry at the ninny who wrote that. I apologize if nothing enlightening has ever escaped these weary fingers; I was simply trying to make a point: Don't FUCK with my people!!
    Disclaimer: You guys are cool. Sorry you couldn't tell that was I who had been angry. Although I am flattered to be compared to Terry.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:27 PM  

  • Oh yeah, and anyone who desecrates Warhol by spelling his name wrong.. well, they shouldn't speak. Esp. about art.

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 3:29 PM  

  • Well done on a nice blog Don the "Head Chimp". I was looking for information on french impressionists and came across your post Head Chimp - not quite what I was looking for related to french impressionists but interesting all the same!

    By Anonymous Anonymous, at 8:42 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home