Sine scientia ars nihil est
"Art without knowledge is nothing"
First, let me start off by saying: I'm not an art critic. I know little about the artistic process compared to more learned scholars. However, I do know what I like and what I don't like. There are many forms of media
can be art. Music, Painting, Ceramics, Dance, Writing, Cinematography, etc. I love all forms of art, I love its beauty and its intrigue. Also, as a passable artist myself, I'm offended my those who like to pass off
certain pesudo-art as true art. First, let me place a definition on art. This will make it easier to explain my view.
Art - A well trained form of expression while putting your emotions into a physical manifestation.
I will now I'll dissect my definition further. I mention that art is a form of expression. Thusly, something is not art if it was not meant to have expression put into it. So-called artwork, that is used for -only-
making money, is not art, it's a product. There has to be a message or a meaning to the piece or it's just advertising. Also, just because something looks good or "cool" doesn't make it art.
Art also must be well trained and disciplined. This means that there must be control and craft to the art. Anything that can be easily reproduced is not an art form. By reproduction, I mean it is practically impossible
to distinguish the original from the replica. A plain black canvas could have immense meaning to the painter, but to anyone else, even a trained art critic, it could easily be confused with just another black canvas.
Anybody could reproduce it without any thought or degree of difficulty. When I appreciate art, I try and find the message behind a complex structure. A constant drum beat could symbolize the monotony of everyday life to
the drummer, but it can be easily reproduced by anyone, thus losing its meaning.
With that said, I must contest many people who call certain things art. Some modern art for instance, may have a whole lot of expression put into them. However due to their simplicity I cannot appreciate it. Cartoons,
are often not referred to as art because they are often easily duplicated, and many are poorly drawn, scripted, and/or narrated. There are many cartoons that I consider art, however. Calvin and Hobbes, for example, was
not only one of the best drawn "newspaper" comics, but it also had a philosophical undertone which certainly added to its quality. Many animated movies are very well drawn, acted, and orchestrated, giving them the term
'art' in my book