- coolmike699
- |
- Fabled Heroic Member
Posted by: just another fan
Posted by: coolmike699
The quality of art is what is subjective, not the definition. The definition of art is set, and it has nothing to do with commerce.
"the use of skill and imagination in the creation of aesthetic objects, environments, or experiences that can be shared with others" if this is the definition to go by, it's a wholly useless definition because that would make just about make everything an art. That's something I simply consider stupid. A spoon took creativity and imagination to be created and you can surely share it.
You can of course become more specific, just as video game arts. In which case, sure. video games are art. But in the broader picture? As I said, most definitions of art are not the ones I agree with. Especially the philosophical ones.
And you'd be surprised how few things i call art. You keep mentioning Shakespeare, but I have never called him an artist or his work art.
Going to sleep now. So you win, or something. A bit more seriously; definitions can change and defining art is an art form in itself. ;) So what definitions of art are available, I pay little attention to.
Last year, my uncle sent us a very nice handcrafted spoon. I can't see why anyone wouldn't call it art.
Of course the definition of art makes almost anything art, that's the point. Arguing that games aren't "art" is pointless, because of course they are.
Now, we can argue over whether they're "good" art, or if they're at the same artistic level as anything else. But if we don't at least start with a set definition, the the debate is doomed to go nowhere.