Deprecated: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in /home/public/Sources/Load.php(225) : runtime-created function on line 3
Art and its definition
I Read This
May 24, 2018, 05:52:18 EDT *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: New here? Read our voting instructions and rules
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 29
  Print  
Author Topic: Art and its definition  (Read 47359 times)
Gizensha
Campaign Management Staff
Free Speech Advocate
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 10053


Dragon Winged Fox


WWW
« on: July 20, 2008, 18:30:52 EDT »

Defining art?

*points to sig*

The context of said quote being that all art and all entertainment pose problems to the audience, prodding us to greater understanding of chaotic patterns, etc. It's just that art is more intense in that, and entertainment. Also that in no medium other than games design do the practitioners assume that they can't pay their bills if they go for 'art' rather than 'entertainment'. The majority of all artistic media for all years is entertainment, and something being entertainment is not a criticism of it, but it's the art that we remember. [Well. In the case of music, the art and My Ding A Ling.]

(Although record companies do seem to push artists towards entertainment rather than art, and fans of the music fans seem to assume it.)

...Of course, Raph Koster, in the same book (A Theory of Fun For Game Design) also postulates that at least one impressionist game already exists... And, I'm guessing most people on this forum have played it at least once.

He starts by describing impressionism in various other media: Impressionist painting is about painting the way the light plays in a scene rather than painting the scene. In a final piece the object the picture is of is absent, yet due to the way the light plays on that object is painted accurately you can still see the object. Impressionist music is primarily based on repetitions, with incredible complexity especially regarding chromatic harmonies, and varied orchestration, but melodically repetitive. Ravel's orchestral work is probably the epitome of the impressionist music style, Bolero, for example, consists of the same passage played over and over, identical both harmonically and melodically, but orchestrated differently at each repetition with different dynamics. Impressionist writing is with the idea that characters are unknowable, but allows the reader to know what characters aren't...

So, from looking at impressionism in various media, he then postulates that a impressionist game would be one with a formal system conveyed that the object sought to be understood was neither visible nor depicted, that negative space is more important than shape, and that repetition with variation is central to understanding.

A game that fits those criteria? Minesweeper.

(Seriously. Get that book, it's a fantastic read on an interesting subject, and written in an extremely friendly style.)
Logged

Quote from: Tim Guest
Interactive Fiction is computer gaming's best parallel with poetry: complex, subtle, and these days absolutely unsaleable.

Quote from: Raph Koster
Art and entertainment are not terms of type - they are terms of intensity
Psy
Pundit
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3049


« Reply #1 on: July 20, 2008, 19:07:00 EDT »

Again look the debate of Hip Hop were surveys show over 60% of black youth is upset over the current state of Hip Hop and most white youth listen to Hip Hop simply because they think it is a true reflection of black culture (and that black culture is cool).  For example when Monie Love told Jeezy that Hip Hop has lost its artistic qualities, Jeezy response was that Hip Hop is doing well because of the sales.  Consumerism strips all the artistic merit from art to the point that art can only survive in the underground.
Logged
Heq
Trouble
Pundit
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 1391



« Reply #2 on: July 21, 2008, 11:16:20 EDT »

Psy, You're making an argumentum ad populum, it's a logical fallacy that argues that becuase many people believe it, it has validity.  Under that system of argument for a long time I could argue the earth was a centre of the universe, or all non-white cultures were self-destructive.

Giz, I'm not so sure I buy that.  Of course, I'm looking at it from an artist-first argument, which requires some degree of cogence in the artist about what they are making to differentiate between art and entertainment.  Of course, using terms like sublime doesn't help because who can say when something comes close to a "divinity".

I fully admit I have never "gotten" impressionism, and that I probably lack the psychological make-up to ever "get" it.  I have to admit it's art, but it's clear that I would have trouble saying why it is art.  The classical answer is that the artist does not set out to create a certain thing, whereas the entertainer or craftsman does.
Logged

"No common man could believe such a thing, you'd have to be an intellectual to fall for anything as stupid as that."-Orwell
Psy
Pundit
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3049


« Reply #3 on: July 21, 2008, 11:57:33 EDT »

I take you are totally unaware of the drama in the Hip Hop community over capitalism killing the art form of Hip Hop.  As Hip Hoppers reminisce of the good old days back in the 80's and early 90's back when there was no money in it and the artists did just for the sake of art, back when Hip Hop was pure and true, uncorrupted by capitalism.  Now Hip Hop is run by capitalists that are not even part of the Hip Hop community and don't understand the art form that sign up "artists" that are popular yet have no artistic skill.  Most Hip Hoppers point to the fact that the talentless hack Soulja Boy is even considered as a major artist is proof capitalism is killing the artistic qualities of Hip Hop.

Capitalism makes all music sound the same thus capitalism kills art far more then even fedualism, as fedualism just limited art while capitalism is murdering art.

Logged
Current
Pundit
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3141


« Reply #4 on: July 21, 2008, 12:11:53 EDT »

Psy, you seem to be complaining that those who buy Hip Hop music have bad taste in such music.  I agree.  This has nothing to do with those supplying it.  People demand rubbish, they get rubbish.
Logged
Psy
Pundit
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3049


« Reply #5 on: July 21, 2008, 14:14:18 EDT »

Psy, you seem to be complaining that those who buy Hip Hop music have bad taste in such music.  I agree.  This has nothing to do with those supplying it.  People demand rubbish, they get rubbish.
The issue is art is not about popularity, there was a Twilight Zone ep (I think it was Twilight Zone) where a struggling writer brings back Shakespeare to write a TV screenplay for him,  as the TV execs re-write the script and vision of the screen play Shakespeare quits due to it no longer being art so his talents was being wasted.

Capitalism and art is incompatible with each other, art is about expression regardless who understand it, while capitalism is about sales.
« Last Edit: July 21, 2008, 16:05:46 EDT by Psy » Logged
Gizensha
Campaign Management Staff
Free Speech Advocate
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 10053


Dragon Winged Fox


WWW
« Reply #6 on: July 21, 2008, 16:19:44 EDT »

Psy, you seem to be complaining that those who buy Hip Hop music have bad taste in such music.  I agree.  This has nothing to do with those supplying it.  People demand rubbish, they get rubbish.
The issue is art is not about popularity, there was a Twilight Zone ep (I think it was Twilight Zone) where a struggling writer brings back Shakespeare to write a TV screenplay for him,  as the TV execs re-write the script and vision of the screen play Shakespeare quits due to it no longer being art so his talents was being wasted.

Capitalism and art is incompatible with each other, art is about expression regardless who understand it, while capitalism is about sales.

...Shakespeare? Setting out to create art rather than something to appeal to the masses?

*giggles*

Shakespeare was deliberately trying to maximise audience size, by including things designed to appeal to various demographics.
Logged

Quote from: Tim Guest
Interactive Fiction is computer gaming's best parallel with poetry: complex, subtle, and these days absolutely unsaleable.

Quote from: Raph Koster
Art and entertainment are not terms of type - they are terms of intensity
Psy
Pundit
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3049


« Reply #7 on: July 21, 2008, 16:35:06 EDT »

Psy, you seem to be complaining that those who buy Hip Hop music have bad taste in such music.  I agree.  This has nothing to do with those supplying it.  People demand rubbish, they get rubbish.
The issue is art is not about popularity, there was a Twilight Zone ep (I think it was Twilight Zone) where a struggling writer brings back Shakespeare to write a TV screenplay for him,  as the TV execs re-write the script and vision of the screen play Shakespeare quits due to it no longer being art so his talents was being wasted.

Capitalism and art is incompatible with each other, art is about expression regardless who understand it, while capitalism is about sales.

...Shakespeare? Setting out to create art rather than something to appeal to the masses?

*giggles*

Shakespeare was deliberately trying to maximise audience size, by including things designed to appeal to various demographics.
Yup, The Bard (The Twilight Zone), we have to remeber there is the image of Shakespeare limiting audience appeal by using the King's English.
Logged
Medivh
Pundit
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3466


Power-mad elf


« Reply #8 on: July 21, 2008, 21:02:43 EDT »

Capitalism and art is incompatible with each other, art is about expression regardless who understand it, while capitalism is about sales.

Seriously, this is a whinge in the vein of "good art doesn't sell because people are stupid." It's not an argument against capitalism, it's an argument for better art education.
Logged

And if i catch you comin' back my way
I'm gonna serve it to you
And that ain't what you want to hear
But that's what I'll do
-- "Seven Nation Army", The White Stripes

So what you're telling me is that LTV's fudge factor means more than it's independent variable?
Yes...
Gizensha
Campaign Management Staff
Free Speech Advocate
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 10053


Dragon Winged Fox


WWW
« Reply #9 on: July 21, 2008, 21:36:51 EDT »

Capitalism and art is incompatible with each other, art is about expression regardless who understand it, while capitalism is about sales.

Seriously, this is a whinge in the vein of "good art doesn't sell because people are stupid." It's not an argument against capitalism, it's an argument for better art education.

Plus, I don't see art failing due to capitalism. On the converse, this is pretty much the first era in history that visual artists are able to sell non-portraits and other commissions in significant quantities to make ends meat (even if they're selling cardboard boxes with each side painted a different colour. I quite like modern art, but... yeah.) Lowry and Van Gough were born in the wrong period of time, basically (This is especially true of Van Gough if you look at his last painting/s where he pretty much goes "Who cares about perspective?" and adds such concept to the aspects of his work that he was previously playing with... And while the indie movies are typically more artistic than the Hollywood ones, they can and do get made. Etc, etc.
Logged

Quote from: Tim Guest
Interactive Fiction is computer gaming's best parallel with poetry: complex, subtle, and these days absolutely unsaleable.

Quote from: Raph Koster
Art and entertainment are not terms of type - they are terms of intensity
Psy
Pundit
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3049


« Reply #10 on: July 21, 2008, 21:57:14 EDT »

Capitalism and art is incompatible with each other, art is about expression regardless who understand it, while capitalism is about sales.

Seriously, this is a whinge in the vein of "good art doesn't sell because people are stupid." It's not an argument against capitalism, it's an argument for better art education.

Underground doesn't have this problem, not because fans of the underground is smarter but because artists in underground don't care about catering to the masses and fans in the underground ignore what is popular.  This actually how Hip Hop started, it started as a big FU to the mainstream, it started as large block parties in the Bronx and Harlem in the 70's by unemployed artists doing the art for unemployed fans in their hoods.  The problem with capitalism is that capitalism goes for the lowest common denominator, now Hip Hop is a FU to the underground while it goes after the fad chasers. 
« Last Edit: July 21, 2008, 22:01:13 EDT by Psy » Logged
Medivh
Pundit
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3466


Power-mad elf


« Reply #11 on: July 21, 2008, 22:14:10 EDT »

The underground doesn't have this problem because the people who seek underground hip hop are better educated to its nuances. Thus, they're seeking music that challenges them a little more, while the mainstream artists are looking to fit their art into the same slots as previous hit songs because, guess what, humans are biased to like things that are similar to what they've liked in the past, by default. Art that challenges a person is less likely to be liked immediately; they have to evaluate the art before deciding whether it fits in their preferences or not. This can't be done on first appearances.

And actually, hip hop is an art form that started much like blues did; it was cheap and accessible to the under-classes. Hip hop more so than blues due to only requiring two people, while blues requires some home-made instruments as well. It's the same class of art as Irish folk music, essentially. Just by a different culture.

And again; the "lowest common denominator" argument is an argument for better education, thus raising the LCD, rather than against capitalism.
Logged

And if i catch you comin' back my way
I'm gonna serve it to you
And that ain't what you want to hear
But that's what I'll do
-- "Seven Nation Army", The White Stripes

So what you're telling me is that LTV's fudge factor means more than it's independent variable?
Yes...
Psy
Pundit
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3049


« Reply #12 on: July 21, 2008, 22:52:06 EDT »

The underground doesn't have this problem because the people who seek underground hip hop are better educated to its nuances. Thus, they're seeking music that challenges them a little more, while the mainstream artists are looking to fit their art into the same slots as previous hit songs because, guess what, humans are biased to like things that are similar to what they've liked in the past, by default. Art that challenges a person is less likely to be liked immediately; they have to evaluate the art before deciding whether it fits in their preferences or not. This can't be done on first appearances.
Yet when capitalists consolidated the music industry in the later half of the 90's is when Hip Hop was dragged into the mainstream against its will, all of sudden artists had to jump through the hoops of the capitalists to get contracts, capitalists didn't want alternative or underground artists.  As Hip Hop has been hijacked by capitalists it has become highly regressive to the point it is just pop that sounds like Hip Hop.

Quote from: Medivh
And actually, hip hop is an art form that started much like blues did; it was cheap and accessible to the under-classes. Hip hop more so than blues due to only requiring two people, while blues requires some home-made instruments as well. It's the same class of art as Irish folk music, essentially. Just by a different culture.

And again; the "lowest common denominator" argument is an argument for better education, thus raising the LCD, rather than against capitalism.
Hip Hop didn't have a problem with lowest common denominator when it was outside the mainstream.  Even in the early 90's when it was alternative with small labels, it still didn't have to worry about the lowest common denominator but the problem is capitalism consolidates everything into one size fits all.
« Last Edit: July 21, 2008, 22:53:38 EDT by Psy » Logged
Gizensha
Campaign Management Staff
Free Speech Advocate
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 10053


Dragon Winged Fox


WWW
« Reply #13 on: July 21, 2008, 23:54:31 EDT »

The underground doesn't have this problem because the people who seek underground hip hop are better educated to its nuances. Thus, they're seeking music that challenges them a little more, while the mainstream artists are looking to fit their art into the same slots as previous hit songs because, guess what, humans are biased to like things that are similar to what they've liked in the past, by default. Art that challenges a person is less likely to be liked immediately; they have to evaluate the art before deciding whether it fits in their preferences or not. This can't be done on first appearances.

Pattern matching.

If the pattern of something doesn't fit our pre-defined notions of what the pattern should be like, we just hear noise.

The canonical example being 'three chords and the truth' rock fans hearing jazz for the first time, and not recognising it as music initially. Some will start to see the pattern in a couple of songs, and decide weather they like it or not on it's merits, those that don't will consider it to be music but 'not my cup of tea', those that do will consider it to be good music. And those that don't start to see the pattern will think of it as just noise.

(Chapter 2 of Raph Koster's A Theory of Fun For Game Design is on this concept, humans as pattern matching machines. The specific jazz/rock example is heavily paraphrased from page 26)
Logged

Quote from: Tim Guest
Interactive Fiction is computer gaming's best parallel with poetry: complex, subtle, and these days absolutely unsaleable.

Quote from: Raph Koster
Art and entertainment are not terms of type - they are terms of intensity
Medivh
Pundit
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 3466


Power-mad elf


« Reply #14 on: July 21, 2008, 23:58:11 EDT »

The underground doesn't have this problem because the people who seek underground hip hop are better educated to its nuances. Thus, they're seeking music that challenges them a little more, while the mainstream artists are looking to fit their art into the same slots as previous hit songs because, guess what, humans are biased to like things that are similar to what they've liked in the past, by default. Art that challenges a person is less likely to be liked immediately; they have to evaluate the art before deciding whether it fits in their preferences or not. This can't be done on first appearances.
Yet when capitalists consolidated the music industry in the later half of the 90's is when Hip Hop was dragged into the mainstream against its will, all of sudden artists had to jump through the hoops of the capitalists to get contracts, capitalists didn't want alternative or underground artists.  As Hip Hop has been hijacked by capitalists it has become highly regressive to the point it is just pop that sounds like Hip Hop.

How does this refute what I've said? If you re-read the post, you'll see that you've made a point that rather supports my own.

Quote from: Medivh
And actually, hip hop is an art form that started much like blues did; it was cheap and accessible to the under-classes. Hip hop more so than blues due to only requiring two people, while blues requires some home-made instruments as well. It's the same class of art as Irish folk music, essentially. Just by a different culture.

And again; the "lowest common denominator" argument is an argument for better education, thus raising the LCD, rather than against capitalism.
Hip Hop didn't have a problem with lowest common denominator when it was outside the mainstream.  Even in the early 90's when it was alternative with small labels, it still didn't have to worry about the lowest common denominator but the problem is capitalism consolidates everything into one size fits all.

And this has... what?... to do with the origins of hip hop? A better question, though is "your statement argues against capitalism... how?"

Really, you seem to have read what I wrote, ignored it, and answered the statements that you wanted me to have written. Not everything is in the shades of the political spectrum that is your personal bugbear.
Logged

And if i catch you comin' back my way
I'm gonna serve it to you
And that ain't what you want to hear
But that's what I'll do
-- "Seven Nation Army", The White Stripes

So what you're telling me is that LTV's fudge factor means more than it's independent variable?
Yes...
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 29
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!