Re: ART vs. DRAMA

["Brandon J. Van Every" <vanevery@indiegamedesign.com>]

Thom Kevin Gillespie wrote:

> On Sun, 12 Jun 2005, Brandon J. Van Every wrote:
>
>
> If the artist is there it is ART
>
> > So it shouldn't be difficult for you to understand how 
> > http://www.random-art.org/ is also 'real ART'.  The artists, in this 
> > case, are those who vote on the works and thereby advance or diminish 
> > their merit.  The randomness is most explictly being accepted or 
> > rejected, that's half the point of the site.  A site that presented 
> > only random images with no selection would probably bore us.
>
>
> This doesn't sound random. Sounds like lots of picking and rejecting 
> is going on.
My point exactly.  The raw materials are algorithmically random.  The 
final displayed products are definitely the product of human aesthetic 
judgement.

I'm pretty sure you objected stridently to http://www.random-art.org 
earlier as 'mere decoration' when Mark brought it up.  I could be 
mistaken as to the nature of your objection.  In any event, I would 
still like your definition of 'decoration', as it is core to either our 
different views, or to our ongoing miscommunication, case may be.

> Brandon ART or art, DRAMA or drama?

There seem to be 2 concerns here.

- ART vs. art, which seems to be a distinction between so-called good 
art and so-called bad art.

- real art vs. not real art, which seems to be whether the label 'art' 
should be applied at all.

'decoration' seems to be your term for 'bad art'.  But I'd like you to 
be the one to define it.

DRAMA I'll leave aside until we get ART sorted out.


Cheers,                     www.indiegamedesign.com
Brandon Van Every           Seattle, WA

20% of the world is real.
80% is gobbledygook we make up inside our own heads.