Advertisement
having a debate with a friend and thought we'd post it for all y'alls to see what other people think.
if art is defined through creation, wherein lies the role of destruction in the process? can an act of destruction ever be construed as "art", since we cannot have creation without destruction? does the intention of creation vs. the product of creation make something "art"? for example, if in destroying an object one creates an empty space of potential (and that is the intention), is that considered an act of art or just an act of violence? hmmm...whatcha thinking?
if art is defined through creation, wherein lies the role of destruction in the process? can an act of destruction ever be construed as "art", since we cannot have creation without destruction? does the intention of creation vs. the product of creation make something "art"? for example, if in destroying an object one creates an empty space of potential (and that is the intention), is that considered an act of art or just an act of violence? hmmm...whatcha thinking?
posted by:
|
SF Bay Area
|
Advertisement
Advertisement
-
Re: destruction in art
Thu, March 29, 2007 - 5:26 PMIt depends on what the intention is.
Mindless destruction of something is exactly that... mindless.
Revolution is useless unless one has a better structure to replace the old with.
If something is destroyed and a new creative element arises from it, then it is transending.
I've never been drawn to situation where someone calls this "ART" and they pee in a jar, or light themselves on fire, bite the heads off mice etc..... Someone breaking a tea-cup, in my opinion, is not creating art.
People call something art with what speaks to them and what they respond to, some like darkness and destruction, I prefer illumination. -
-
Re: destruction in art
Wed, August 22, 2007 - 2:38 AMI think that destruction and construction in art are two sides of the same coin.
Just to dissect some examples you gave:
If someone pees in a jar....they are releasing toxins from their body......a natural way of "creating" space in their bladder to filter more food and drink.....that of which was of course first "destroyed" by the teeth and gums and stomach and intestines......or maybe I should say "transformed" by digestion. The urine in a jar is trapped, and therefore creates a whole discussion space for onlookers surrounding the jar. (that's us)
"when will it get out?", "who the hell peed in there?". As an act that our bodies fulfills naturally.....is pissing not art?
If a teacup is smashed, then cannot the shards be used to fuel a mosaic?
Art is an active task.
I personally find decomposition in it's many forms very enlightening : )
I suggest checking out>>>
"Compost-Modernism":
tribes.tribe.net/shadowjam...938099a953
Discussing Decomposing Matter:
compostcompulsion.tribe.net/
-
