3 ms·
It occurred to me that in the case where someone created a thing and didn't intend to create art, but you received it as art, that is indeed art. Was the famous
by jboy55 5y ago
It occurred to me that in the case where someone created a thing and didn't intend to create art, but you received it as art, that is indeed art. Was the famous urinal 'art' to Duchamp, before Duchamp exhibited it as 'art'?
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- TheRealNGenius 5y agoYou may have misinterpreted certain aspects of my blog post. If someone created something that they didn't intend as art, no matter what my reception is, it's not art. So before Duchamp exhibited it as art, it is certainly not art.
- jboy55 5y agoMy point is, Duchamp saw it as art, where the creator of the thing did not. So what was the matrix like for Duchamp? I argue he saw something was art, that was not created to be it.
- TheRealNGenius 5y agoAh okay apologies, thought Duchamp made it. But yeah, I'd agree with you, they saw something as art that was not created to be. So they're just wrong. It's like if someone couldn't find a toilet so they just took a dump on a display toilet at Home Depot. Someone comes along and calls it art. They're wrong. That's just fecal matter.