First, thanks to kathy:

'People who talk about revolution and class struggle without referring explicitly to everyday life, without
understanding what is subversive about love and what is positive in the refusal or constraints, such people have a
corpse in their mouth.'
Raoul Vaneigem: The Revolution Of Everyday Life

And this, from Erin:

I saw this quote in a music magazine and it reminded me of

interdisciplinary art ("inter" meaning between).

"The true meaning of the word BETWEEN has intrigued me for many years.

For example, the clouds are fascinating because of their between-ness;

they are both air and water, and they exist between us and space. In

literature, the story between the lines can sometimes be the most

interesting one. What happens between people when they meet or when

they are together? What happens between musicians when they play

together? And what might happen between musicians and audience during

a performance?" (Froydis Ree Welkre).

See Ya!

Erin

Computer games are a great reflection of interdisciplinary art.

Melissa – who sent the url for the ever creepy alice in wonderland game

Hallow’een as carnival?

HIGH ART OFTEN SPEECHLESS IN A CRISIS: "Although the artistic fruits of the recent national crisis and the current war have only begun to appear, the fine arts have not been particularly responsive to the major crises of American history." The enduring images of such times tend to be produced by non-artists whose work takes on artistic meaning after the fact. The New York Times 10/14/01 (one-time registration required for access)

I came across on that said something like art is only art when it is accepted by society.

I disagree that art would be considered art if the artist solely believes it is art. If that were the case, then why wouldn't the artist keep his creation in his mind, where it would be in its purest form. In order for art to be art, it must strike a chord with others, even just one person. As humans, we all think and perceive the world, so we see it in different ways. Once art is exhibited, and someone else sees the artist's vision, is when art is art. When others share with the artist, is when it is art. Tangible art is only art when others share it, other wise the artist would keep the pure creations in their mind.

-Djordje Todorovic

I'm totaly with you on the art is perception thing. Art isn't art to

everyone, if it was it would be too easy. Different people have different opinions of what they like and what moves them, that's why art is such a challenge and in a way more difficult then reproducing a formula in math class. Maggie.

In my mind it's all about perception. 

I've always thought that

art was no more or less than what an audience accepts as art. Indeed, a lot of

great art has come from people who could care less about an audience

tom kerr

I began to think about the art of small children.  When a young boy or girl spends time to make a drawing or a painting, is that art?  Or does that person need to  be trained, to be aware of what they are creating and why?  If so, then when does the art of an amateur become the art of an artist? 

Elaine

(perception?

I think that we are all artists, and I guess we become

Artists Kim

I think an artist is someone

who creates....and not necessarily for the public.

Karen

In response to the definition of real art, I don't think we can ever define

it. For me, art

is self expression...however deep the meaning is. Reagan

As the artist, I want to see reactions from other people to my work,

and wether or not I got the reactions that I wanted from my audience. When

someone is the artist or creator of something, he/she needs to get feedback on

it from a third party because the artist knows his/her own work too

intimately. The artist can't really experience their own art from any other

perspective than the creator of the art, he/she is limited to watching the

reactions of the audience, and trying to empathize with them.

Neil Sylva

<<<< art is communication >>> all art, even if it is not created with the

intent to 'show and tell', is an effort at reaching out. art can start with

the simple expression of a wish whispered in a shell. perhaps no one was

around to hear it, but you have just given it shape by saying it out loud.

you've given birth to an idea, a hope, a dream - the stuff that all art is made

of - and, by letting the breath of inspiration((((flow))))from your mouth, you

have commmunicated something with yourself. and, if you believe that the point

at the centre of your heart is the place from which the Infinite streams out,

you haven't just communicated with yourself, you've communicated with the

universe-at-large.

once the inspiration is born, the pontential for art is activated. that wish

becomes the seed that is planted in your mind and, if it is nourished, it will

grow branch-like extensions that spread throughout our body - the network of

interlacing lines that translate impulse to action...

+-=-+=axons and dendrites, vessels and veins, muscles and bones, leaves and

vines, stems and branches, wind and rain, sun and moon, night and day=-+-=-+

...if that tree is to bear fruit it must be born of an act of love and faith!!!

the fruit is the art. and the fruit carries a seed that will nurish the hungry

and grow in the fertile ground where it falls.

>>>between the brains that plan and the hands that build there must be a

mediator. it is the heart.<<<<<

Quoting Koby Rogers Hall <kobz@YorkU.CA>:

> art is communication. one can still communicate while remaining true to

> one's

self-expression.

are any of us taking the Fine Arts,

> contributing to this listserv to keep our

ideas to ourselves? we're

> here 'cuz we want to contribute, and WE WANT to put

our ideas out

> there. and through creation i think this makes us artists.

AMEN

Isn't art anyone who creates?? It just brings us back

to the question who is considered an atist. I think anyone can be. But that's my opinion.

Anna Ezechiels

... a little

promotion...that helps.

okay, must go now...will add more later.

zeina

Who is an artist:

Ok I don´t know who said that children weren´t artists, and I really don´t

care! That just shows how little that person interacts with kids.

Mariana ( no oe said that)

She

also said something about being ourselves, and that made me think also that

when were're kids, we haven't learned to do things to please other people, and

conform to what society want or expects from us. After all, isn't that what

the point of art is: to be ourselves and express it to others?

-Lina Marques

Picasso:

"It has taken me a lifetime to learn how to draw like a child"

ORIGINALITY:

As a question, does anyone reading this message think that originality is a pre-requisite in art? Consider how much music is almost identical to other music - any song by Good Riddance (a punk band) for example - or plays or books on hackneyed subjects. Does art have to break new ground to be true art? And if not, they what about blatant copies? If someone exactly copies a painting, is the art now partly the copiers? Think about it.

Tom

Cf Benjamin – work of art in the age of mechanical reproduction

Age of cybernetic systems

Frankenstein collagewriting – sampling etc.

Hi all,

After having read all of these messages for the last month I thought I would

finally contribute to the collective whole.

The question brought forth by Tom in RE: pondering. What do we call the art

that is simply a copy of something else.

[…]

One can also look at the accusations

made toward Shakespeare's work. Many people say that most of his ideas were

pirated from other lesser known playwrights of that time and that it was simply

his style and quality of craftsmanship that made him so famous.

Alexandra

there are aspects of other ideas in every new idea. Ideas are born of

culture and experience- if our ideas are solely our own, then we must have been

raised in an isolated box!

Furthermore, it is far more important how we develop an idea than the idea

itself was originally. Tamar

this is getting kind of far from Arts & Ideas, but Liz Asselstine covered the

subject of originality in her lecture friday, saying that the strive for

originality was all about feeding the ego of the artist. she also quoted someone

as saying "your manuscript is both good and original. however, the parts that

are good are not orignal, and the parts that are original are not good." i

thought this was funny/interesting.

Christina

This is typically called artisanship. It takes skill, but real art is in the actual creation process, thinking up the ideas and the method of making them tangible. Doesn't matter how much the product inspires people. I used to write really bad poetry (now I write sort of mediocre poetry), but just because it was trite and un-eloquent doesn't mean it wasn't art. It got my creative juices going, it let me express myself, and it was mine. It was art to me. And it was art to other people, albeit un-talented art. On the other hand, artisanship is sort of like what we did in class with the Dadaist poetry. We used somebody else's ideas and technique to create something that we could put our collective name to but that we couldn't really claim as ours entirely

without admitting a little bit of respectful borrowing. This is not to say that what came out of it wasn't interesting or entertaining, just saying that we didn't think up the process necessary for the transfer of "our" ideas (cause I doubt most of us actually agreed with the Dadaists) into the visible product.

Kirsten

Kristen (or anyone else),

Just to provoke discussion, would you consider Marcel Duchamp's "LHOOQ" an

original or a skillful piece of artisanship? (The Mona Lisa with the

moustache). It's a slightly modified copy of an original but Duchamp has

definitely added his own meaning to it.

-Reagan

(good point!)

I completely agree with the idea that artists should be allowed (and

encouraged) to make their own twists on the work of others. It both gives

credit to the original artist, and encourages expression - often people are

able to produce their best work if they are given something to work with

initially, and go from there. Tom

here's something I'm not so sure of: my poster containing a replication of Michelangelo's Creation of Adam.  Personally I don't beleive that this is really art, after all someone just took a picture of it intending it to completely resemble the original.  The only benefit is that I can buy a peice of the Sistine Chapel to hang on my wall for ten bucks.  So I guess I'm just wondering how far we can take copies being art?  I really do think to that a case could be made to defend my poster as art with a little effort. Emrys

I also agree with Sadie in the idea that it's cool that you can replicate

something and put your own spin on it but that doesn't give you full credit

for it. I think that if you don't come up with the idea totally on your own

then you can't really feel a sense of acomplishment for what you've created.

How could you, you're not stealing the other persons ideas but.... I can't

explain it, it's not your idea, so your not really creating, you just adding

on. This is just my opinion.

Maggie.

I'm not sure where I stand on copying or adapting in

other disciplines, perhaps because I know less about these art forms.

~Rebecca

Two things: Perhaps this can of worms has already been opened, but yeah, think of the new art that can come from things like collage or musical sampling. It's very hard to think of a new idea in this day and age, so the artist sort of has to turn to using past art as a tool for future invention.
Brett

I think it's modern-day-graffiti. People like it. It sells. If it has meaning, it's for the art critics to decipher. Some people just think it's funny. I'm one of those people. I'd buy an imitation. A replica. A copy. I DON'T CARE ABOUT ORIGINALITY!!!!!!!! AHHHHH!!!!! :)

Melissa berg

Atleast, it was a reflection of the times. An individual, who tries to steel some of the fame of someone as famous and great as Michelangelo, deserves to be prosecuted and shunned as a criminal.
Melisa berg

by the way everyone steels from someone else in the world of art... only its

not called stealing its called learning from everyone else.

Jason

Politics:

I am interested to hear your views on the success of the protest. I

happen to work in the financial district and was very unhappy with the chaos

it resulted in. What was the purpose of the presence of weapons and the

burning of the US flag? If people have a problem with the Harris government,

why don't you go inconvenience them directly? I don't see the purpose in

frustrating people who are simply trying to go to work.

Why is listserv becoming a floor for politics anyway?

Laura

Do truths always constitute the Truth?

I think that we (as potentially influential people) should be questioning the 'news' buzzing around us. I also think we should should not be afraid to speak out against, or in support, of what's going on in our region and world.  I certainly see my role as a musician being very influential. Why? Because people listen to artists. We express things that either can't be articulated fully in words, or that others are afraid of saying. We inspire. As we have been seeing, artists have even been influential in bringing about social revolutions.

...I guess truth can be called 'realness'. So, if we - real and genuine people- personify reality and ‘genuiness’, in our creativity, and aim to be truthful in our artistic expressions (or representations), wouldn’t that would be an awesome combination? Think about it!

That's my bit....

Janelle

Is it possible for art to have no purpose at all? Or maybe this

ties in with those artist that just let things come from their subconcious.

I just feel like i have never lost the way that children create art. They

just do whatever comes to them... for no reason or purpose...

Erin

L’art pour l’art and art as a vehicle and response to material conditions, poverty, social situations, unrest…

This class IS NOT about one being more valid than the others…

What’s th4 point

A poem…

And then:

I'm draggin myself around with that feeling, that tint of 'what's the point'.  I'm feeling it in my light step that's getting heavier, and my gaze that's finding it harder and harder to focus on one spot for more than a few minutes.  Ashamed for being here, for being comfortable, for not knowing what the next step is, for not having the guts to make a step forward, and if I do, most likely making a foolish/irrational step.  Misdirected restlessness and guilt and self-pity/selfishness enough to kill a small animal :P

~Sarah  ( does this have anything to do with Arts and Ideas? i hope so, otherwise i made an arse of myself for nothing)