Where does art come from?

We are in agreement about that. But again: The question (as the title!) of this thread is: “Where does art come from?”

If you are only saying that art comes from art (art is communication and comes from communication), then that does not or at least not sufficiently enough answer the question (as the title) of this thread: “Where does art come from?”

Art does not come from art. Art comes from the need to communicate, emotions, ideas , knowledge. Since my phone won’t show me the emoji hitting itself on a wall could someone please place it here for me.

But you’ve said that it does. See again:

That’s what you’ve said: Art comes from and is (a form of) communication. So the conclusion of your own words is: Art comes from art.

S o r r y .

Only if you mean the interaction of human emotions, human ideas, human knowledge. And if you mean the interaction of human emotions, human ideas, human knowledge, we are again in agreement, but will have to define that more closely.

O t h e r w i s e :

We turn around in a circle again.

:stuck_out_tongue:

:laughing:

We create art in order to make certain valuable aspects of life persistent, to preserve them, to record or memorize them. That’s the purpose of it.

Does it come from anywhere or is it manifest in the moment; drawn from yesterdays headlines? Art is likely the least original thing on the planet. So far it is only a product of reflection.

And what is a thing that can only be said is the thing after consensus. It did not exist until someone claimed it as art. That should give anyone a clue to form where it comes. What of all the poor objects existing in limbo crafted by human hands, are they not objects of their own account. A screw is art. Before this was that it was thing, craft, edifice. idealog. I got a bunch of things objects, that I have crafted, no one sees them, are they art? They are lumps of clay, fashioned. Art is cultural, not absolute.

What do you think art is? The natural world does not give one fuck about what man thinks is art. That should tell us something about what we think about art.

And when art is decadent it is just the other way around.

The “natural world” is not interested in “what man thinks is art”, and man is not interested in what the natural world is interested in.

Do you believe then, that the natural world is capable of expressing interest?

“Fountain” by Marcel Duchamp. Art?

Note that I used quotation marks (“natural world”) and that all living beings are part of that “natural world”.

So does art come from somewhere or does it manifest given what ever shit happens to be taking place in society? It’s still reactionary, a reflection.

What about eco-friendly/environmental art? I think some animals take notice of our art out of curiosity, to play, to make a new home. What more could art represent than a “home” one can place oneself into?

Yes, decadent art is about goofiness.

Just an example:

i_t_a.jpg
Is that art?

Art is simply how an artist perceives the world at any given time. The only limitation is imagination but beyond that nothing so
anything labelled as art is art regardless of anything else. And it comes from the mind or the soul [ the non metaphysical type ]

So the art object above “tells” us that a certain artist who perceives the decline.

Perceiving this (?):

Guggenheim_Museum.png

It’s a perceived decline. So yes.

The earliest human cave painting is about 40000 years old. And the human internet picture I posted above is about 4 days old.


:-k

Are you suggesting that this devolopment of fourty thousand years has only been a degeneration?

Yes and no. :slight_smile:

I mean there has been a good development, but not always. There has been both progress like sunrise and regress like sunset.