Just what the hell are we talking about when we’re trying to define art? Well like many things that are worth talking about, it’s complicated. And difficult to get a picture from the internet to illustrate the whole notion of.
Well what does the dictionary say? Dictionary.com has a definition of art, but I don’t like it very much. Seems, well, not to fit the whole notion. Not surprising.
Caustic Soda is a podcast I listen to religiously. I love these guys. And they try to define art in their “Art” episode. They’re trying to find a preliminary definition, a common area to talk about, a good idea when having a discussion of any kinds, just to get everyone on the same page and one of the guys says zoologist Desmond Morris, who wrote The Naked Ape, is quoted as saying “art is anything that humans do that isn’t done for survival, procreation or entertainment”
I think that’s not bad. I might go on to clarify that that be “…or entertainment of self”, but that would take a few weeks thinking about for me to be sure that needed to be added or not.
Art is notoriously hard to define. When people ask me (and they do, because being an artist, of course I have a depth of knowledge on esoteric artistic theory), I usually try to give them something pithy. People like pithy. Short and memorable. So I very often will go with something like “Art is whatever a person does that is both a) deliberate and b) intended to produce an emotional effect or describe a concept” or maybe “Art is a system of communicating concepts or attempting to induce emotions in a viewer (listener, observer, what have you); i.e it is a language”. The first one is a bit easier for people totally unfamiliar with art; the second seems to be more informative for people slightly informed about art. I have yet to discuss the definition of art with someone who is very well informed about art.
