I’ve been reading a few books lately, and I want to share what I think happens with art in general:

Art is everything. Philosophy, especially, is not art because philosophy wants to be separate from art. So we let it. Maybe philosophy needs this kind of identity. Maybe it was the men who were philosophers who wanted their field of art to be tough and hard, so they said that art is not what philosophy is. Ask Danto about this. He is better at explaining the relationship between art and philosophy.

And I think that this is the thing about art: there are people who explain art. They tell you this is art, that is art, and over here is art of such and such a kind. Other people listen and then interpret what this means.

They might say that, oh, I don’t know, such and such a thing is art, and only such and such a thing is art, after having read an article or a whole book on what art is. I think that sometimes happens. There might be reasons for this.

Then there are people who, for their own reasons, I believe, draw lines in the sand: up to here, it is art, and whatever is over there is not art.

If you ask me, someone is always explaining what art is to an audience that has asked what art is. Sometimes, some people are satisfied with one explanation. Sometimes, they want other explanations as well, by other people, about other kinds of art.

Sometimes, that means finding someone who sees art in something no one else did before. Sometimes, it means finding someone who declares something art despite prior definitions.

Sometimes, you are any one of these people. Sometimes you are all of these people.

“Hey, is this art?”

And then you trace a meandering boundary around certain things until it closes into a shape. Whatever lies inside becomes art.

Unless you are a philosopher: then you draw a line around philosophy and say that whatever lies inside isn’t art.

Quelle: Code & Canvas