4 ms·
This reads like a very harmful and toxic view on art? Could anything beautiful, cute, positive even be art for you? And how does the viewer even see the sufferi
by PurpleRamen 4y ago
This reads like a very harmful and toxic view on art? Could anything beautiful, cute, positive even be art for you? And how does the viewer even see the suffering of the creator?
- farleykr 4y agoI took their comment to mean that the definition of art lies in the fact that a human created it as a response to their experiences as a human. Beautiful things can be made from suffering. Maybe therein lies the undoing or redemption of suffering. At least sometimes or to some degree, even if minuscule.
- PurpleRamen 4y agoPeople also see nature as art. A photo from a butterfly, a cat doing cute stuff, the sunset, and so on. None of them are man made, no one suffered for them to exist (usually). None of these are valid?
- farleykr 4y agoNot sure what you mean by "valid" but I don't think anyone's arguing that butterflies, cats, and sunsets are not valid. I love watching or looking at all of them but that doesn't make them art. Again, I think the comment is arguing that the definition of art lies in who created it and why. Not whether it is nice to look at.
- potta_coffee 4y agoNature is beautiful but it's not art. A photo of nature may be art though.