#Art Philosophy

[demon-girl-izalith]

I do agree with the majority of what you say, but I think I disagree with the characterization of art as a transcendental beauty that exists fully independently of "political reasonance", of people and their interaction with the piece. The art doesn't exist in a vacuum, part of what makes it living is it's context and the communicative element it has with people. I think this interpretation here takes a fully subjective perspective on the art that I don't think quite captures the communicative, give-and-take aspect that I think we use to define art itself.

For example, when I engage with a piece of media I enjoy like the movie Office Space, a piece that has both pro-capitalist but anti-corporation elements, for example, I WILL be critical of some of these elements as the art does not exist in a vacuum, but I will also bring to the table a recognition of the qualities in the piece that met my axioms or expectations. And I think if I'm using my expectations, axioms, etc as a metric then the piece is going to be not fully subjective.

I do think there WILL be a layer of objectivity to that and I think the art itself should be looked at critically, we should ask what it's trying to say and what its appealing to, it SHOULD be the art's problem. We should ask if the piece is really tapping into an "aesthetic" very well, or, for example, if by appealing to the pro-capitalist aspects, if office space is not committed enough to doing so. Perhaps the piece was meant to interact with one aesthetic principle one form, and instead could be argued to be more strongly tied to another. That's where discussion about what a piece is saying becomes important.

By interacting with the art I'm bringing to the table my identity, my expectations and axioms and forms that I'm feeling pull on me, so I'm looking for these in a piece, and so it is entirely fair to criticize the piece for not meeting that expectation, especially if it demonstrates elements that otherwise engage with these themes that may have caught my attention to begin with. It leads to feeling misled by the piece, feeling like an aspect of the art isn't there that should be, as if the art is tied into larger aesthetic realities and they aren't being manifested by the instance of the work in engaging with. Of course, with a different perspective, a different set of axioms, I may indeed find that the piece IS meeting the standards of some other infinite form or transcendental aesthetic, but perhaps not the ones I'm looking for.

Ultimately I think you've made the art too transcendental here, removed too much of its humanity, defining art as a spectacle and nothing else rather than a communicative process that exists connected to ourselves as agents viewing it. Art can be a spectacle, but especially with art made for consumption, I think it is also made in a political context for real human minds, it is still communicative and it is not merely a spectacle. Claiming it is this and only this feels reductionist to me.

i dont think fight club was co-opted by the right because they didnt get the satire, it was co-opted because it fuckign kicks ass. they would have co-opted any movie that is that good and has hot sweaty men in it. right wingers aren't aliens, they know a good movie when they see it, the lesson isn't "don't make satire because the wrong people might think its for them" the lesson would be "don't make art that kicks ass" and i'd rather there be art that kicks ass

[hwei-theories]

╰┈➤Why Jhin and Hwei conceal their eyes - symbolism

In the world of artistic expression, hiding or covering certain parts of ourselves can hold significant meaning. This is especially true for Hwei and Jhin, two captivating characters from League of Legends. Each of them conceals an eye—Hwei his left and Jhin his right—and these choices go beyond mere aesthetics. They reveal deep insights into their personalities, their struggles, and their unique philosophies about art and creation. By exploring why they choose to hide their eyes, we can uncover the complex emotions and motivations that drive them as artists.

Eyes are an important symbol in Hwei's character. You can read more about it here.

Hwei: Concealing Chaos

Hwei's decision to cover his left eye can be interpreted as a manifestation of his desire to shield the world from the chaotic intensity of his artistic vision. As a character who embodies the creative process, Hwei grapples with the duality of artistry—the beauty and the chaos that often coexist. By hiding his left eye, he may be indicating a fear of unleashing the destructive potential of his emotions and creativity.

The Struggle with Expression

Hwei's background suggests a tumultuous relationship with his art. He represents an artist who is acutely aware of the power his creations hold. The left eye, often associated with intuition and insight, may symbolize the chaotic and uncontrollable aspects of his artistry. By concealing it, Hwei acknowledges the darker facets of his creative process that he struggles to manage. This concealment can be seen as a protective measure, both for himself and for those around him. Remember how empathic he is?

In the context of artistic expression, Hwei's hidden eye indicates the emotional turmoil he faces while trying to balance traditional artistry with his unique, often intense style. This tension reflects a broader theme in the art world: the battle between the artist's internal chaos and the need for external acceptance. Hwei's journey is not just about creating art; it’s about navigating the complexities of his identity as an artist. His concealed eye symbolizes the parts of himself that he feels are too dark or misunderstood, representing a struggle to integrate these elements into his public persona. His masters never wanted him to unleash his full potential - because of its danger.

The Emotional Connection

Moreover, Hwei uses his art as a means of connecting with others, and his hidden eye suggests that there are aspects of his emotional landscape that remain inaccessible. He embodies the notion that art is a bridge between the artist and the audience, yet his concealment signifies a barrier that complicates this connection. By covering his left eye, Hwei may inadvertently distance himself from others, revealing the challenges of vulnerability inherent in the creative process.

His journey mirrors the experiences of many artists who grapple with their inner demons while striving to create work that resonates with others. Hwei's struggle to balance his intense emotions with his desire for connection reflects a universal truth about the artistic experience: the fear of being misunderstood or misinterpreted.

Jhin: The Pursuit of Perfection

In stark contrast, Jhin's choice to cover his right eye speaks to his obsession with precision and control. As a meticulous killer and artist, Jhin embodies the philosophy that artistry requires an unwavering commitment to perfection. His quote, "Symmetry is so boring," shows that he might have covered up his right eye so that he is not symmetrical.

The Role of Symmetry

Jhin’s mask, which obscures his right eye, serves as a tool rather than a mere accessory. It is designed to enhance the challenge and danger associated with his artistic pursuits. By blocking vision in his left eye and dampening it in his right, Jhin intentionally removes depth perception, creating a disorienting experience that forces him to rely on his other senses. This choice reflects his belief that true artistry is derived from overcoming obstacles and embracing discomfort.

The Drama of Creation

Furthermore, Jhin’s mask stifles his breathing, adding an element of theatricality and drama to his character.

Jhin’s obsession with symmetry and perfection extends beyond aesthetics; it shapes his entire worldview. By concealing his right eye, he suggests that he is willing to sacrifice clarity and comfort for the sake of achieving his artistic vision. This choice reinforces his belief that true beauty lies in the balance of chaos and control, a dance he orchestrates with every kill.

The Intersecting Journeys of Hwei and Jhin

While Hwei and Jhin operate within different artistic paradigms, their choices to conceal their eyes highlight a shared struggle with identity and expression. Both characters grapple with the complexities of their artistic visions, albeit from different angles. Hwei’s concealment reflects a fear of chaos and emotional intensity, while Jhin’s serves as a testament to his quest for perfection and control.

Artistic Duality

Their journeys illuminate a broader theme within the artistic realm: the tension between creation and destruction. Hwei’s left eye symbolizes the emotional chaos that can accompany artistic expression, while Jhin’s right eye represents the calculated precision required to achieve a vision of beauty in death. Together, they encapsulate the duality of artistry—the balance between vulnerability and control, chaos and order.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Hwei and Jhin’s choices to cover their eyes are not mere aesthetic decisions; they are vital components of their identities as artists. Hwei’s left eye, hidden from view, symbolizes his struggle with the chaotic nature of his creativity, while Jhin’s right eye reflects his obsession with precision and control in his murderous artistry. Together, they illustrate the multifaceted nature of artistic expression, revealing the tensions that define the creative process. Their journeys remind us that the act of creation is often fraught with challenges, as artists seek to balance their inner chaos with the need for connection and acceptance. Through their concealments, Hwei and Jhin invite us to explore the depths of their artistic souls, encouraging a deeper understanding of the complexities of artistry and the human experience.

[ghoulierstudio]

I could no longer resist the urge to make an altoid tin shrine for my inspirations. It long feels overdue

[b0ilet]

Creating 'Bad' Art

The reason you look at your art and feel such disgust and disappointment is because you know your potential. Delicacy and taste are a practiced sense that comes with time spent considering creation. Currently your taste is higher and more cultured than your ability which is why you feel able to cast judgement on other peoples work who are arguably more skilled than you.

But knowing you can't yet create that image you have in your head isn't a reason to never try. It's really the opposite. You need to create a thousand bad things to create your one good thing.

Lets say arts value comes from its impact. Bad art would be art that is unimpactful. Art that makes you feel nothing. You may be an elitist dick who hates modern art because it "takes not skill" and "I could've done that so what makes this circle on a blank canvas so special?". But that art make you feel an emotion, albeit anger, you still felt something at the hands of someone else. If your argument for why art is bad is that "you could've done it"... then why didn't you? You may feel something is bad because you feel you could've done it but you never did it. you never put yourself out there and made anything because you were too scared of making something someone found worthless. They did something. You did nothing.

"Make good work. Make interesting work. Make the work you want to see.' - My College Art Teacher.

Make bad art because god forbid you have a good idea and you lack the skills to make it real.

[teach-or-trav]

What has been the most interesting are the ways in which the universe yields to you when you declare to yourself and the world that you are an artist and mean it.

When things seem down, you keep creating, when things are good, you keep creating. You do this to show the universe that you are indeed the artist you say you are. After a while, in the most unexpected times, the god momentum which has taken over starts attracting people, resources, ideas 💡, and muses.

You begin to create things you never thought were possible. You find out how strong you are made and how resilient you truly are. You realize though, that that strength, and endless flowing of creative ideas comes from the original declaration. “I AM AN ARTIST” This declaration mixed with consistent creation everyday is where the alchemy flows and where the magic is made. It is what makes the shuffling back and forth from the conscious to subconscious realms possible.

[clementinecompendium]

Book List: Aesthetics, Neuroaesthetics, & Philosophy of Art

Why Science Needs Art: From Historical to Modern Day Perspectives 1st Edition by Richard Roche (Author), Sean Commins (Author), Francesca Farina (Author)

Feeling Beauty: The Neuroscience of Aesthetic Experience by G. Gabrielle Starr (Author)

An Introduction to Neuroaesthetics: The Neuroscientific Approach to Aesthetic Experience, Artistic Creativity and Arts Appreciation 1st Edition by Jon O. Lauring (Editor)

Brain, Beauty, and Art: Essays Bringing Neuroaesthetics into Focus by Anjan Chatterjee (Editor), Eileen Cardilo (Editor)

Philosophy of Art: A Contemporary Introduction (Routledge Contemporary Introductions to Philosophy) by Noël Carroll (Author)

Philosophy of the Arts: An Introduction to Aesthetics 3rd Edition, by Gordon Graham (Author)

The Oxford Handbook of Aesthetics (Oxford Handbooks) Revised ed. Edition by Jerrold Levinson (Editor)

Aesthetics and the Philosophy of Art: The Analytic Tradition, An Anthology (Blackwell Philosophy Anthologies) 2nd Edition, by Peter Lamarque (Editor), Stein Haugom Olsen (Editor)

What Art Is by Arthur C. Danto (Author)

After the End of Art: Contemporary Art and the Pale of History - Updated Edition (Princeton Classics Book 10) by Arthur C. Danto (Author), Lydia Goehr (Foreword)

Ways of Seeing: Based on the BBC Television Series (Penguin Books for Art) by John Berger (Author)

Art and Its Significance: An Anthology of Aesthetic Theory, Third Edition 3rd Revised ed. Edition, by Stephen David Ross (Editor)

But Is It Art?: An Introduction to Art Theory by Cynthia Freeland (Author)

The Art Question by Nigel Warburton (Author)

Arguing About Art: Contemporary Philosophical Debates (Arguing About Philosophy) 3rd Edition by Alex Neill (Editor), Aaron Ridley (Editor)

Art Theory: A Very Short Introduction (Very Short Introductions) by Cynthia Freeland (Author)

Aesthetics: A Very Short Introduction (Very Short Introductions) Illustrated Edition, by Bence Nanay (Author)

The Cambridge Handbook of the Psychology of Aesthetics and the Arts (Cambridge Handbooks in Psychology) by Pablo P. L. Tinio (Editor), Jeffrey K. Smith (Editor)

Aesthetics: A Comprehensive Anthology (Blackwell Philosophy Anthologies) 2nd Edition, by Steven M. Cahn (Editor), Stephanie Ross (Editor), Sandra L. Shapshay (Editor)

Philosophies of Art and Beauty: Selected Readings in Aesthetics from Plato to Heidegger by Albert Hofstadter (Author, Editor), Richard Kuhns (Author, Editor)

Art, Aesthetics, and the Brain Illustrated Edition, by Joseph P. Huston (Editor), Marcos Nadal (Editor), Francisco Mora (Editor), Luigi F. Agnati (Editor), Camilo José Cela Conde (Editor)

[xray-vex]

here are some of my really general a/i predictions, re: art --

techbro types who want to generate bullshit as a get rich quick scheme will saturate the market and nobody will want their worthless shit, they'll get bored and move onto the next get-rich-quick trend. remember nfts? lol

people who got into a/i because they thought it was a legit way to make art will get bored of it because it won't challenge them to do anything & it will not be gratifying in the long term - those types will either: 1.) quit or 2.) start making actual art

people who buy art will get sick of looking at a/i generated shit that essentially all looks the same. real artists making real art will get more interest again because it will seem new and exciting.

same thing with films & stuff too. i definitely think that various actors & creators guilds & other creative industry unions should do everything they can to protect their art & craft against being outsourced to a/i, but i do think that people who watch films will get sick of a/i in films the same way people got weary of CGI overuse in films. a/i in film might not go away completely, but audiences will absolutely be drawn to films that don't use a/i.

i think the basic gist of what i'm trying to say is that human beings need actual art, and the vast majority of people don't fully, actively realize how interwoven art is to literally everything in their lives. on some level they must know, because when it's missing, they miss it. they seek it out. art in general is important to the fabric of society: storytelling, entertainment, community, emotional fulfillment, etc. and people want something real, tangible. they want something created by humans.

****this is why, i'm guessing, that fan art & fan fiction are so popular. most people who create those sort of works are doing them for the actual love of what they're making. and then those works create community. humans have been sitting in groups to tell each other stories and to express themselves visually & dance together with music forever. for literally ever. all of human history. literally all. art is the fucking foundation of society, civilization, human evolution. to make art & to experience art, to some degree, on some level(s). non-negotiable. essential as food and water. i'm dead serious.

a couple of examples of similar times that tech threatened to make the "real thing" obsolete, but failed to do so:

e-readers were supposedly going to make print books obsolete -- they didn't.

streaming music services helped usher in a renewed desire for physical media again.

for awhile, both of those things did kill a lot of brick & mortar music/book stores, but there has been a bit of a resurgence and lots of small businesses.

and no, things will never go back to the way they were, but things would have changed regardless, capitalism being what it is.

it would be nice tho, wouldn't it, if digital tech presented augmentations to our need to have art in our lives constantly, instead of threatening to replace them completely?

i'm just going on pure vibes here & from what i know about art & being an artist for 35+ yrs, some tech & aesthetics philosophy, and from having worked in retail books & music/dvd sales many moons ago. so i could be completely full of shit here.

but i do have some hope that things re: a/i will get better for people -- for real, working artists & authors & musicians & performers & creators. humans need art the way they need food and water. this has always been true for the entirety of human existence.

i'm just sort of in my thoughts & feelings about art tonight and felt like rambling about it.

now i'm gonna make more tea.

[rococ0caffeine]

wowo Nietzsche wanna be #byme

[titleknown]

...I will say, I think a thing that the critics of AI art get wrong is that, a lot of them say that "They'll never be able to get a real illustration job using their fake-art" due to the medium's limitations, but in my experience, that's not what a lot of committed AI artists are doing.

Like, a lot of dabblers fit that paradigm to be sure, but like, the people who're committed to it are the ones I see combining it with other art skills, like photomanipulation or Programming Shenanigans or creative writing or video editing or so-on.

Like, I'd say that AI Art flourishes best as a part of multimedia art approaches, one new tool amongst the many multimedia artists use, and to treat it as just a competitor to traditional illustration is to ignore that...

[eclipse89]

insane long post art philosophy astrophotography ramble below \/

i like to think about how much of my work is actually noticed by the viewers. this is kind of an interesting thread to pull on because i do multiple types of art, and each has a different level of accessibility and behind the scenes quality to it (that being like, how much of the work you do behind the scenes is acknowledged by the viewers).

i'd say digital art is the most relatable to people (almost everyone has drawn something in their life; no, they may not understand the full depth of what *you* do as an experienced artist but they get the general idea and skill level necessary to do it), and therefore the most widely praised. you could make the same argument for photography but that's a whole can of worms with how photography has been hollowed of meaning/normalized to death with smartphones, i'd wager they relate more to a subject and that the art itself of photography is somewhat foreign to them.

pixelart is in a sense, a more unknowable version of digital art. most people have probably seen it before, but not done it; they might think they have a general idea of how it's made (it may be right, or it may not be). it's still relatable on a surface "this drawing is cool" level of course but there's a distinct divorce with the final product and the behind the scenes factor. this comes up a lot, in art forms with a more unknowable behind the scenes factor the divorce is larger and larger.

astrophotography is a whole different paradigm. you might think, like pixelart, it's just an extension niche of photography; it isn't. it shares some proverbial blood, and the key thing here is that the shared traits are all in the final product- not behind the scenes. outwardly, it looks quite similar to photography; it may even use the same equipment, and can sometimes achieve similar results to an untrained eye. but behind the scenes is a completely different process.

this divorce is insanely large, and since outward result isn't necessarily easily noticed as different or unique (from normal photography of the same subjects), it creates this weird reaction where people *think* they can relate to the entire thing totally (since typically people understand the basic mechanics of photography; using a camera, taking a picture, etc) even though what's happening behind the scenes is utterly alien to them.

since the result is similar enough to regular photography, instead the value of the art is moved from the final result to behind the scenes. which is odd, pixel clusters or brush strokes individually aren't the value of the art; they're a means to an end. yet with AP, the value *is* partially at least in the technical quality of the image- something the average viewer literally cannot and does not see or understand, for the most part.

this overall, makes the art form naturally resistant to public viewing/large scale publicity. it also tends to create an echo chamber type of environment where the only people that can fully understand and appreciate the art, are other artists. imagine if by and large, the public couldn't really relate to digital/traditional art. think about the impact that would have on like, everything. it's a weird situation for an art form to exist in.

[poet-to-none]

I had a certain feeling, twice in a day, a few days ago I saw in a documentary a painter's studio shoes looked exactly as his canvas does, coated with the same paint and textures that give voice to his style

I re-read in a beloved book the details of a vampire's paintings have almost a. . . terror. . . in the depth of their reality, if one were not also a vampire seeing them

I think the feeling is about recognizing the transfer of the soul, from artist to canvas, how the art's surrounding the artist in their life before it even happens, it's already part of them

[stardustexpress]

What the Fuck is Art?

Read it on Medium: https://medium.com/@stardustexpress/what-the-fuck-is-art-87b757fadb3

Here’s the thing, there’s no actual definition of what art truly is. Sure you can look up the dictionary definition and call it a day, but that’s boring. I want you to sit down and ponder about it with me.

Art is subjective. It can mean anything. To some it’s their passion, some would say it’s decoration, and to some it’s a waste of time and money.

During one of my gaming sessions where I would spend hours playing Genshin Impact, I decided to play Nilou’s story quest, To The Wise. I won’t say any major spoilers but the gist of it was the Zubayr Theater receives a notice that the theater will get demolished due to their constant violation of the Akademiya’s rules regarding the performances they put out. Throughout this quest, a particular NPC caught my attention, Khasani.

Khasani was previously an Akademiya scholar pursuing the mastery of art. However, he left this path because the more he pursued its mastery, and the more he became a connoisseur, the more estranged and lost he felt with what art truly is. At some point, he asks you and Nilou what you think the definition of art is and that led me to spiral down into this article.

Now if you were to ask how I define it, I’d say that art is both an escape, and a language.

Many artists refer to their craft as an escape from the burdens of everyday life. In this world full of problems, pressure, and burdens, art becomes a sanctuary. It is a way for you to vent out your emotions, letting yourself get lost in the process and forget about whatever it was that is bothering you.

Art reflects the beauties and horrors there is in life. It serves as an outlet where you can freely express yourself and your thoughts with no limits. It helps us communicate the things that are difficult to talk about, freeing us from the constraints of words and immersing ourselves with the language of color, shapes, and movements. There are no rules in this beautiful world, the only limit truly is your imagination.

Have you ever walked into a museum, an art gallery, or even scrolled through social media, and saw this artwork that just sucked you into a whole different dimension? Like the air was punched out of your lungs the moment you laid eyes to the piece. Or after finishing a good movie/series you feel transported back to the real world after being so immersed in that fictional world? That’s just one way of art serving as a literal, almost physical escape from the real world.

"Art doesn’t discriminate, and it appeals to all. Everyone has the right to appreciate art." -Nilou

Not to be that person who looks down on those who just like art for its visual appeal and aesthetic, albeit some of those people tend to look at art on a surface level and if it doesn’t fit their visual aesthetics, they consider it invaluable. That being said, I personally think that it takes a deeper level of comprehension to understand the true essence of a piece. To see beyond the colors and shapes takes a lot of understanding.

Understanding art is like learning a new language, its mediums are its dialects. With this in mind, asking an artist of a certain medium, like graphic design per se, to animate is like asking a person to speak a language they barely know. Sure they can speak it but it wouldn’t be as fluent and refined as someone who has dedicated their time and effort to study that language.

Just like languages, each medium has its own intricacies and technicalities. It takes a lot of effort to be fluent in one. Seeing people who think that we, artists, can do all mediums with ease is kind of insulting to those who have spent so much to master a medium. Seeing people who look down on artists, using the overused argument that everyone can draw, sew, paint, etc., making their craft seem insignificant, is infuriating.

Art is a language not everyone speaks. Humans tend to devalue and ostracize things they do not understand instead of doing the work to understand one thing better. This is one of the reasons why there is so much backlash against abstract art (i.e. Who’s Afraid of Red by Barnett Newman) and high fashion (Schiaparelli Spring-Summer 2023 couture collection, Inferno).

The thing is, art does not discriminate. People discriminate art just because it’s beyond their understanding.

"The meaning of art comes not from its creators, but from its audience.” - Khasani

Going back to Nilou’s quest, the story received so many negative comments from fans, and many players dislike Nilou because her story is “boring” or her existence in the game is simply for fanservice. People who failed to understand the meaning of the quest, nor Nilou’s existence in the game are the same people who look down on artists and the creative industry. The same people who demand creators to produce more quality work in so little time, yet refuse to pay for an artist’s services. Art is nothing in the eyes of an ignorant man.

At the end of the day, this is just my understanding or how I view art. How you define it is all on you. Life without art is devoid of meaning.

Art surrounds us. From the clothes we wear, the music we listen to, the shows we watch, the games we play, even the packaging of your favorite snack. Failing to see and acknowledge its value takes a lot of ignorance.

Now ask yourself. How do you define art?

[ghoulierstudio]

✨Art long

[katapotato55]

just out of curiosity: how do you survive without validation?

this question is mostly aimed at artists here, but this can apply to anyone. So to clarify: How do you keep going without giving up as an artist? how do you feel good about your art when no one online notices you for it? I will go first. for me personally, I love the process of creating rather than the end product. I enjoy making silly things and drawing them no matter how ugly they look. sometimes i make something pretty. it can be hard no one noticing something you worked hard on, but i have learned to love the act itself rather than the end product. learn to have fun with it. anyone else relate? or maybe you have a different opinion? discuss!

[randomquotesfromanywhere]

Art, from the beginning, endeavored to express emotions and historical facts to be understood by all human souls of all nations, without need of written words. Art uses the gestures of human beings, the atmosphere of the universe to convey thought and emotions and to record events. Without thought and emotions, it has no reason for existence.

Anna Lea Merritt

[mentalhealtvent164366]

why is it when i make art i only wish to convey pain in convoluted ways? the horrors that lurk in my mind, why must they be my medium? do i wish to be heard? understood in a way so special to me? am i even special? why do i deserve my feeling to be set on a canvas for decades?

do others feel the same? are we all just trying to find ways to be heard? understood?

i wish my art was beautiful, so maybe others could enjoy it, rather than hear me, or understand me. why must they empathize with me?

in writing this i find i want people to be in ignorant bliss of the world i live in.

how does one turn pain into beauty with the stroke of a brush? perhaps its their eyes or the flick of their wrist? maybe they're just kind?