Art

Art is perhaps too complicated a topic to even attempt to discuss. I like to begin a discussion with a basic (if inadequate) definition. The complexity of discussing “art” stems from the fact that the very definition is complicated, controversial, and elusive. The Wikipedia entry on “art” gives a definition from Britannica Online, which I suppose is as good as any: “the use of skill and imagination in the creation of aesthetic objects, environments, or experiences that can be shared with others”. Wikipedia also notes that philosopher Richard Wollheim describes the nature of art as “one of the most elusive of the traditional problems of human culture”.

Questions regarding “What is art?” can become highly emotional, and are impossible to answer objectively. Like beauty, art is in the eye of the beholder. While I personally am more comfortable with using the term “art” to describe things like paintings and sculptures and music and literature, almost ANYTHING can be viewed as art, and I cannot objectively disagree with someone whose definition of art is different from mine.

At the same time, if we agree to label EVERYTHING as “art”, then the term loses all meaning and usefulness, just as if we were to label all colors shades of “blue”.

In the end, I suppose we must simply acknowledge that each of us has our own standards not only for what constitutes “art”, but also for what “art” we personally find appealing. I would be happier coming up with some objective judgement on what constitutes art, or at least some way to assure that those who were claiming something was “art” were at least sincerely representing their own view, but I know of no way to accomplish either of these goals.

Truth is complicated.