Why aren't more people finding this course on KZread? This is great!

This is awesome! Very clearly presented and thought provoking. Thanks for posting this.

Great class, thanks for sharing your knowledge.

Love this 😁

img1 I think both of these sculptures are art. Ignoring the fact that we're seeing images of the sculpture being shown through a screen and not the physical works (already adding to the question of 'Is it Art?'), the sculpture on the right would be the least likely to be considered art, simply because it's a reproduction of an idea someone has already put into the physical. But if we look at Art as an idea being materialized, the sculptor that produced the statue on the right had a vastly different idea to the sculptor that produced the statue on the left. Whether it be for commercial use or simply as a study to improve the sculptor's skills, the right sculpture was born of a different idea - meaning it is its own "original" Art piece. img2 Drawing from the last pair of images, I believe that the "Art as a materialization of an idea" argument still stands. In this pair of images even a bit more. The image on the right is clearly altered - the Artist didn't mean to perfectly reproduce the Mona Lisa. This means that (unlike the previous pair of images) it can be confidently presumed that the Artist did not produce this as a study or to sell as a reproduction - making it even easier to consider it an original work of art. img3 In this pair of images we can explore the idea of Art being connected to intention. I think the image on the left is Art, and the image on the right is not. The photographer that took the picture on the left clearly intended for it to be artistic in the sense that they may have thought it was beautiful. The photographer of the image on the right, however, "a picture of a leaf I found in my yard", had no intention of their image being seen as Art. However, it can be argued that the right image IS Art, simply because of the context it's being put in - as a comparison to another photograph. img3 This pair of images can also explore intention, or practicality, of Art. The vase on the left looks like it was made in ancient Greece, and it can be presumed that it's purpose is as decoration. The mug on the right is clearly a method of advertisement, that also serves a practical purpose (to hold a drink). Again, I believe the left vase is Art because it was intended to be - and the mug on the left is not Art because it wasn't intended to be. Not to say that all art must be impractical, vases hold water too - however, the advertisement's purpose is for financial gain, and the idea of this representation of capitalist society being considered Art is pretty uncomfortable. But again, context is everything.

Thanks, very nice.

Everything that is created, is an artwork. That's my bases of life. How do I regard my "smartallic" self, to distinguish actual Art from reproduction and so on? I'm also just starting Arts Appreciation at an Early College :)

@10skingdomorganics4

8 жыл бұрын

11:20

I just fell in love through a voice

thanks :)

This is not the black-figure vase by Exekias of Achilles and Ajax. This is the bilingual amphora in the MFA Boston collection painted by the Andokides painter (red-figure, other side) and the Lysippides Painter (black-figure, show here). Good video, otherwise.

This video gives me trauma thx to school 😭

1). Art, reproduction, 2). Art, vandalism, 3). Art, if that leaf is art, it means NOTHING is non-art, which would mean everything is art, therefore art is nothing, and lastly, 4). Art, brand awareness ad. As for "why or why not" my answers are self-explanatory

@nicholisesmithbobjunior1889

6 жыл бұрын

10's Kingdom Organics wow. What an artistic comment. Sure means a lot