|
Post by Ana on Oct 12, 2005 20:16:02 GMT -5
what is it that makes art, and what is it that makes "obsene things"?
p.s ldragontongue and ariahnrod-if only it was the end of the year in civics...
|
|
|
Post by zobothewitch on Dec 17, 2005 14:11:25 GMT -5
The artist makes the art, well duh. What i mean is the artist feelings makes the art. When you go to a museum and look at art you see what the artist was feeling and thinking.
|
|
|
Post by Ana on Dec 17, 2005 16:03:38 GMT -5
but what do you consider art, and what do you not consider art? how do you draw the line, and what art can and can't be banned?
|
|
|
Post by Narcissa on Jan 2, 2006 13:49:04 GMT -5
if its sexually explicit or uber violent, then it can have like a warning or something on it so that parents know before little kids see it, but pretty much anything can be art. but i think there's a few requirements. like a crumpled up scrap of blank paper isn't art. art has to be intentional and it has to be tangible. you have to be able to appreciate it with one of your five senses.
but art cant be banned. if someones done something that a bunch of people object to, it should have like a warning on it, like on tv before shows come on theres a thing that says MA and stuff. but you can't ban art.
but if you make something that you dont care about and its only purpose is to inflame somebody, then thats not art and it can be banned. when you make art you have to care at least a little bit for it to qualify as art.
|
|
lucius
Advanced Student
Your scar is legend. As of course, is the wizard who gave it to you.
Posts: 219
|
Post by lucius on Jan 3, 2006 13:00:08 GMT -5
mmm i think art is someones view, imagination or opinion, that has a physical form (e.g. a painting, sculpture etc.) in order to show other people that persons view, imagination etc. therefore somebodies art, to another could be obscene and an obsenity to someone could be look upon as a masterpeice by another. for example about 4 years ago or somet a 9 year old girl painted three different coloured stripes across a peice or paper and she got 4 million for it, now to me that painting wasnt art and my cat could of done better with its food, but she still gt world wide recognition and a big bag of cash. there will neva be a definition for art, as its always changing, as are people and there opinions. well thats wat i think, probably rong but neva mind
|
|
|
Post by none on Jan 3, 2006 13:06:47 GMT -5
^ I agree. Art is...unique, and special. Art expresses your feelings. Art should be able to send out that feeling to anyone who sees it.
|
|
|
Post by Lilly Dragontongue-Skywalker on Mar 21, 2006 20:06:55 GMT -5
Everyone has very nice opinions on this. Ana, I am going to directally answer your question, as it applies to the United States. In the 1970's Supreme Court case "Miller v. California" a test was established (the Miller test) to determine is material was obscene (and therefore could be banned or limited.) According to the Miller test, something is obscene if: 1. It has no artistic, literary, political, or scientific value. 2. It exists only to "excite lust" or to "appeal to the pruriant (look that word up at your own risk) interests". 3. If the average person using "contemporary community standards" would find the material obscene. So, if an artwork falls into one of these catigories, it is obscene (which means that it does not have full 1st amendment protections).
|
|
|
Post by Narcissa on Mar 23, 2006 23:05:38 GMT -5
do light patterns count as art?
|
|