Art

[Rory]

Is art masculine or feminine?

What I've been able to figure is that it is a lie - paints a picture that either is not true or no longer exists, and is an attachment to the past.

[Sharly_Li]

Im not sure about painting, but being a musician I consider the creative and composition aspect of music ‘masculine’. I think music becomes feminine and passive when musicans do cover songs for the shear purpose of a crowd’s response/approval, and when pop stars get producers to write songs for them for that same reason.

I find nothing wrong attaching myself to the past. Sometimes acknowledging my past helps me understand how I came to my current state of being, and what I express through my music may help reflect that.

[Carl G]

What I've been able to figure is that it [art] is a lie - paints a picture that either is not true or no longer exists, and is an attachment to the past.

There are two types of art, subjective and objective. Subjective is what you describe above; it decoratively expresses the artist's thoughts or emotions or illustrates some aspect of popular culture. Objective art, on the other hand, is an expression of truth, and can alter the viewer, especially if the viewer is aware and open. An example of this is Feng Shui, the oriental art of placement. Through Feng Shui the energy flowing through a space (and therefore through oneself) can be measureably improved. Other examples would be Tibetan and Navajo sand painting, and Leonardo DaVinci's oil paintings, which use geometry and color to invoke higher states.

[Steven Coyle]

What I've been able to figure is that it is a lie - paints a picture that either is not true or no longer exists, and is an attachment to the past.

The goal of the "true artiste" is to bring out the truth.

That's why so many artists are so fond of Nature.

-

Beauty in truth, is Nature's reproof.

[sschaula]

I find it interesting that mostly men have been the greatest artists throughout history. It may have just been because it wasn't a woman's role to do that sort of thing...but if that wasn't the case, then perhaps it's because men are attracted to the femininity of art. It doesn't make them less masculine, in my opinion.

[spacekat]

"O the grey dull day! It seemed a limbo of painless patient consciousness through which souls of mathematicians might wander, projecting long slender fabrics from plane to plane of ever rarer and paler twilight, radiating swift eddies to the last verges of a universe ever vaster, farther and more impalpable" --James Joyce (A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man)

Is this feminine?

[oneiopen]

"O the grey dull day! It seemed a limbo of painless patient consciousness through which souls of mathematicians might wander, projecting long slender fabrics from plane to plane of ever rarer and paler twilight, radiating swift eddies to the last verges of a universe ever vaster, farther and more impalpable" --James Joyce (A Portrait of the Artist as a Young Man)

Is this feminine?

Does art have to be either masculine or feminine?

[spacekat]

Please, would someone tell me the secret to creating an avatar?

[ExpectantlyIronic]

"Art" is a very ambiguous term. Given that it describes a great number of things that have only the vaguest of connections to one another, and no general property seems to run through the whole of it that can't also be said to exist in things not generally described by the term. That said, art exists to make me happy. If you want to know whether it's masculine or feminine I guess you should just take a peak up it's skirt/kilt whatever.

[ExpectantlyIronic]

spacekat,

Please, would someone tell me the secret to creating an avatar?

Do you want to know how to create an avatar image, or how to get it up on the forum? Both maybe?

[Dan Rowden]

Making avatars is very simple. Using any pic editor just crop or resize a picture to 80 x 80 pixels. Done. Then you need to host it somewhere (imageshack or photobucket perhaps if you don't have your own server space).

Just watch out for those feminine avatars - they're not very artistic.

[Dan Rowden]

As to the original question - art is either feminine or masculine, depending on the art in question. Mostly, like music and poetry, art is highly feminine (though there may be a masculine dimension to the construction processes). Like poetry and music, one has to ask what the intended purpose of a piece actually is. What is it attempting to inspire in us? Thought or emotion? And, worse still, is it actually attempting to inspire anything at all? Or is it just a carthartic outpouring of feelings (which is utterly feminine)? One of the best ways to understand what art is about is to listen to the artist talk about their work. If the actual art is in any way ambiguous or confusing what they say about it is almost certain to be enlightening.

[oneiopen]

As to the original question - art is either feminine or masculine, depending on the art in question. Mostly, like music and poetry, art is highly feminine (though there may be a masculine dimension to the construction processes). Like poetry and music, one has to ask what the intended purpose of a piece actually is. What is it attempting to inspire in us? Thought or emotion? And, worse still, is it actually attempting to inspire anything at all? Or is it just a carthartic outpouring of feelings (which is utterly feminine)? One of the best ways to understand what art is about is to listen to the artist talk about their work. If the actual art is in any way ambiguous or confusing what they say about it is almost certain to be enlightening.

IMO, there are some kernels of truth in what you write. Wallace Stevens wrote (I'm paraphrasing) that successful poetry resists the intellect almost successfully. That is key. Good art, successful art, inspires both thought and emotion, it's not either/or, and not an intended purpose but the function of art to do both. That's why you can come back to a successful piece of art (painting, music, poetry) time and time again and appreciate it, understand it in different ways - it was created on many different levels. What I have found interesting is that many famous poets and authors first studied areas of hard business, science or logic, eventually found the study and practice of thought unsatisfactory then turned to literature in some form.

[HUNTEDvsINVIS]

i'm confused. if i told you not to stereotype art, i would be making a stereotype of art myself. But mostly the point of art seems to be originality, a constant amazement and entrancement for the senses. Art should thus not be tied to any weird "masculine" or "feminine" constraint ( in which case its originality levels drop and freak me out). I am still profoundly and disturbingly amazed by the fact that the French language can classify so many seemingly lifeless objects as feminine or masculine. Can someone please ENLIGHTEN me as to why this is the case? Do the words just sound better that way? Calling an apple a she or a table a he is foreign logic to me.

[Blair]

Can someone please ENLIGHTEN me as to why this is the case? Do the words just sound better that way? Calling an apple a she or a table a he is foreign logic to me.

You are enamoured with humanism. This is the cause of all your confusion.

[HUNTEDvsINVIS]

actually, i am writing a story at the moment which deals with accepting the insanity of the world to preserve one's own sanity. The book aims to make one comfortable with the crazy. Suppose it's my way of trying to deal with "it all" and to cast of my evil cloak of humanism/curiosity. It's filled with "satire" to "ease" you into the insane path until you don't even know you're there and quite like it there ultimately. So, be thanks to you noble Prince ( prince ) for helping me accept my destiny ( aka comfort with the crazy ). I'd still like to know the history behind the French categorisation, though. Perhaps a famous artist was mad and madly in love with chairs and apples so that ultimately, in an attempt to pay tribute to his genius, these categories were applied to the non-living by thankful French citizens. with the masses, anything is possible.

[Carl G]

thanks to you noble Prince

FYI, Prince's name is an anagram for his real life name, Pincer. He's actually a crab. Notice how his every post conforms to his namesake?

[HUNTEDvsINVIS]

it's good to know crabs have online access...ahhh...democracy...

[NLPRN]

What is it attempting to inspire in us? Thought or emotion? And, worse still, is it actually attempting to inspire anything at all? Or is it just a carthartic outpouring of feelings (which is utterly feminine)?

Must admit never considered art specifically from this perspective, whether it's primary effect was to induce thought, emotion, both? Or simply artistic regurgitation during emotional-mania?

Music's primary intent to me appears to be emotional stimulation. I could be alone on this but I usually "feel" more than "think" while listening, regardless of genre. Poetry on the other hand is more of a mixed-bag. Frequently there is an emotional component but I not uncommonly realize a different perspective in verse, akin to viewing a microcosm of its author's experience. It makes me think.

The subjectivity of art is of course a given. One man's art is another's garbage..welded junk car parts come to mind. Time to remove the mullet.

I enjoyed this poem (If posted previously, ignore): "Colored" http://www.nepalhub.com/articles-poems/ ... id-97.html

Clarifying explanation, thank you.

[Pye]

.

One could consider all transcendent human endeavor as aesthetic, as Nietzsche in The Birth of Tragedy does. Science, religion, philosophy, music, the plastics arts - all of it is our recasting of the world into forms other-than the world. "For it is only as aesthetic phenomenon that existence and the world are eternally justified." Science, religion, philosophy, music, the plastic arts . . . justifications . . . . one and all.


.

[Diebert van Rhijn]

Is art masculine or feminine?

What I've been able to figure is that it is a lie - paints a picture that either is not true or no longer exists, and is an attachment to the past.

For discussion:

What if we would define art being feminine to the degree it deals with images of any existing object, plant or animal for the purpose of worship, amusement or simple reflection.

Then we could define art masculine to the degree it uses the abstract to convey deeper truths and stimulate higher reasoning. This could include music too but not necessarily any musical performance.

The old Judaic and Muslim law centers around this: "You shall not make for yourself a carved image--any likeness of anything that is in heaven above, or that is in the earth beneath, or that is in the water under the earth".

In Muslim graphical art you can still see a rigid obedience to this because it appears to involve mostly abstract lines and shapes. Allah never had a form or description, neither was the prophet displayed in any fashion.

Surely there's wisdom in this? What is masculine about the world of pornography, theater, video gaming and cinema? Or at least the form in which these have developed over time?

The idols have come to life, almost - we crawl around in their dead skins.

[Matt Gregory]

I think a work of art should be judged based on the spirit in which it was made. I don't think the subject matter alone is at all sufficient for making such determinations.

[Carl G]

I think a work of art should be judged based on the spirit in which it was made. I don't think the subject matter alone is at all sufficient for making such determinations.

That's like saying a person should be judged by their intentions, not their actions. I don't agree. The road to artistic hell is paved with groovy spirit.

[NLPRN]

"I think a work of art should be judged based on the spirit in which it was made. I don't think the subject matter alone is at all sufficient for making such determinations."

Hmmm...I can appreciate the value in the intent of the artist, however, what is intended is not always represented (accurately). I'm thinking of "American Idol", our human circus show that broadcasts just how out of touch many are when it comes to self identity...must get this out of my head. Consequentialism, I believe, ultimately holds the upper hand from the audience's view.

[Matt Gregory]

Carl and NLRPN,

I think people's intentions are often different from what they claim they are or even from what they think they are, but I think a person's true intentions are what determines the consequences of their actions. The path to genius is largely about purifying one's view of oneself and thus one's intentions, and I think art should be judged on that. A good artist will be able to communicate with a good audience. When a bad artist or a bad audience enter the picture then all bets are off. So, I'm sticking to my story.