Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Author Topic: Why artist consider the human body an art?  (Read 4480 times)

Description:

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline PMC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2003
  • Posts: 2616
    • Show all replies
    • http://www.b3ta.com
Re: Why artist consider the human body an art?
« on: August 13, 2004, 10:51:56 AM »
IMHO Art is one of those things like religion and politics - everyone has their own individual take.

The human body can be considered art, especially when you see the lengths people go to decorate and enhance their bodies.  Human imagery is also artistic - but there's a difference between the Venus de Milo and the legs-behind-the-ears imagery on certain top shelf publications.
Cecilia for President
 

Offline PMC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2003
  • Posts: 2616
    • Show all replies
    • http://www.b3ta.com
Re: Why artist consider the human body an art?
« Reply #1 on: August 13, 2004, 03:11:39 PM »
@KennyR

O/T, there was a recent mainstream film released about a couple's relationship and how it changes over time where the actors actually had full sex.  

Not surprisingly it generated a great deal of controversy upon release, but I'm not sure if the "real sex" thing was a marketing ploy for the film or was deemed necessary for the story.  Either way it raises some uncomfortable questions about the audience's motives for watching it.

No, I haven't seen it!

Art can contain sexual images and I suppose some pornography could be classed as art.  The problem is the line where the two meet is difficult to define because each indvidual will interpret it differently.

That's the beauty of art, everyone has their own interpretations of it.
Cecilia for President
 

Offline PMC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2003
  • Posts: 2616
    • Show all replies
    • http://www.b3ta.com
Re: Why artist consider the human body an art?
« Reply #2 on: August 13, 2004, 03:14:27 PM »
Quote

blobrana wrote:
Hum,
intersting, so the `mona lisa` is just a bit of canvas with some paint on it...
The real art was the sitter...?


I was always led to believe that it was the emotions the image stirred that defined the art...  

I see literature as art because of the way the language is used to convey emotion and paint a picture, not necessarily because of the story itself.  
Cecilia for President
 

Offline PMC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Join Date: May 2003
  • Posts: 2616
    • Show all replies
    • http://www.b3ta.com
Re: Why artist consider the human body an art?
« Reply #3 on: August 13, 2004, 03:25:08 PM »
Quote

KennyR wrote:
@PMC

These days art is more often about this shock value. It's a sham, controlled by a few very rich pretentious morons whose whole life experience can be summed up in the word 'valium'. They ran out of ideas a long time ago and can only try to grab an audience by using the worst taste possible.


Right on dude!

Find new ways to shock and titillate the audience rather than telling a new story...

It's telling that not even porn shocks any more, so where do they go from here?
Cecilia for President