Quote:
Originally Posted by glatt
LJ expressed well what I was trying to say in my post.
The problem is that even that definition doesn't capture some things well. I think most people would be in agreement that Mikhail Baryshnikov dancing ballet is considered art. But when I watch him dance, it doesn't make me feel anything other than impressed at his skill. It's pretty and impressive, but doesn't evoke anything else. The medium is dance, the feeling it evokes is nothing. Maybe that's just me. But I wouldn't protest if anyone called his dancing "art." I'd agree with them.
|
I differentiate dance, etc as 'performance art' Performance being the operative word. There's talent, and skill there, but you're right.... It seldom evokes ant reaction beyond admiration of their skill. There are exceptions of course.
To me, poetry is art because it conveys messages or images without actually depicting them. A portrait of a head or a still life is where my interpretation breaks down. It's art, but it's really just a snap shot.
On the other hand, a photograph of a person's head can be art.... so...
