ART FOR ART'S SAKE???
Do you believe in ART FOR ART'S SAKE or do you think there should be some moral design behind art work?
Views: 39
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Liana Metal on -
Art should be for Art's sake...art is everything we live in, why setting limits?
Liana
-
Permalink Reply by Nouma Bushra on -
thanx alot friends...i agree to u Amber...art is an exprssion of everything v feel or simply saying want to express...but moral design or purpose some people think damages the beauty and grandeur of it... what do u say?..i believe when some thing has beauty and purpose both blended to create something awesome that lasts and affects the most.
-
Permalink Reply by Liana Metal on
-
Have a look at this site www.griffinla.com
It's gallery Griffin in Santa Monica, California. The latest display presents David Lynch, Title: New paintings, who is also a well known director. His work can not be characterized as 'beautiful' (according to the notion of Art) but some people like this...
Liana
-
Permalink Reply by Nouma Bushra on
-
thanx liana...its another dimension u r giving to the discussion...
-
Permalink Reply by Nouma Bushra on
-
thanx again for letting me know about the gallery it was interesting going through that...u r right about the nature of the work David Lynch is doing...i would say i call it the modern art with all the unbalances and mutancy of it that we c around in the world and inside human psychology... what is it exactly expressionism or impressionism m a bit confused about the work that falls under these two terms?
-
Permalink Reply by Nouma Bushra on
-
Ninon and Denis... I am obliged. What i want to imply from raising this question is a personal disagreement with the artists doing naturalist or nudist work. I want to discuss and make myself and many like me aware of the least benefit of any work like this. You can ask why should one sort any benefit from some expression of art? You should. Now my point is well, I agree there should not be any discussion about some creative work being fruitful or not but it is needful to talk about the effect of some creative work which is damaging at its best and nothing else. I believe one person's expression should not be damaging or harmful in any way for others.
-
Permalink Reply by sajeesh raj a on -
i agree with this comment. art is for expressing our thoughts and ideas. it should be natural. So why we are setting limits
-
Permalink Reply by Nouma Bushra on
-
well, raj i couldnt get to what comment do you agree? Anything unlimited is not beneficial and mostly dangerous like we can think of unlimited hatred, unlimited rivalry, even unlimited love, unlimited freedom. which one of these do you find even good if not beneficial?
-
Permalink Reply by sajeesh raj a on
-
it's our mind that have to take what is good for us. Any new creative thinking that is beneficial for the growth of art in this world that have to be encouraged. i said setting limits in every new harmless ideas is not good. Sometimes the world cannot digest a new idea. sometimes the contemporary world may not encourage the new ideas which are above than their thoughts. If it is good according to our mind, then it have to get encouraged. Later the time will show importance of those new creations. eg- at the time of vangogh, his painting style was not accepted by his society. but after so many yrs the world realised his importance. we should have a control in our mind to prevent any harmless idea to get changed to harmfull thing. if we are afraid of new thoughts, we can't reach any where. so we should welcome them but we should observe their advantges and disadvantages. if it is gud, then it must get encouragement.
© 2013 Created by Aakriti Art Gallery.
