Mayonnaise is in the eye of the beholder.
Art is in the eye of the beholder.
+1It is not really so much questioned by that crowd, but used as a substitute for thinking.
Really? You make points, with no argument other than your own authority of what you see as truth.
Oh, and where did elephant excrement ever come up in the discussion? A personal preference of yours?
Thinking matters.Ideas matter. Words matter. Grammar matters.
Insects are considered gourmet food by some, eating pork or beef in anathema to others. Some inject poison into their bodies for aesthetic purposes. Values and meanings vary with culture, societal factors, education and upbringing. Trying to define "art" is trivial.I've made not claim whatsoever of declaring "truth". I've only claimed that words must mean something we all agree to or no conversation is possible. The word "art" has a very well understood meaning that has endured across time and culture and has been definitionally agreed-to for purposes of meaningful conversation.
This whole conversation is important because it exposes that level of self-destruction taking place in art (and literature, and music, and sculpting, and ...) When a word can embrace pretty much anything, and that "anything" is defined personally for- and by the speaker, the word has no meaning.
"Art" matters because it's one of the several (but few) ways humans can be uplifted, challenged, thrilled, soothed, and enriched. What "good art" is will always likely be a debate, but what makes "art" shouldn't be contentious.
But in the spirit of "words mean whatever anyone wants them to":
The Tessar lens design is rich with peanut butter and is found in the sacramental rituals of the Snakarooski tribe as they gorge on 2x4s and camel snot.
My personal truth here is that this is a recipe for Chicken Cordon Bleu.
See also: https://pvspade.com/Sartre/cookbook.html
P.S. There was a famous experiment at Bell Labs decades ago where grammatically correct English sentences with meaning were put into a nonsense generator program that emitted grammatically correct English that was utter gibberish. The team then published the results on USENET (a precursor to the internet) and said it was a new work from Jaques Derridas, the Deconstructionist Philosopher. People were so excited about this new "work" that, apparently, Ph.D. dissertations were considering analyzing it. Apparently, the gibberish closely mirrored Derrida's actual writing. Ideas matter. Words matter. Grammar matters.
"Art" matters because it's one of the several (but few) ways humans can be uplifted, challenged, thrilled, soothed, and enriched. What "good art" is will always likely be a debate, but what makes "art" shouldn't be contentious.
I agree that words have meanings and there needs to me some consensus on those meanings before a discussion that uses those words can take place. I know we can beat that dead horse of what “art” is but where I struggle is art vs. craft or art and craft. I’ve attended ”art festivals,” you know, with booths set up by vendors, and some of the wares offered is maybe “art” but some of it, to me, is just a demonstration of “craft.” I am mulling over that the product of AI may fall into that latter category.
In order to distinguish between art and craft, you need to have robust definitions of art and craft. Otherwise, you are just flailing around. And before doing all the intellectual work required to arrive at those definitions, you need to ask yourself whether it is necessary to make such distinction when looking at objects at an arts and crafts fair.
If you are struggling over whether an AI image is art or craft, you might start by revisiting what you understand to be the definitions of art and craft, and do some background reading on the Philosophy of Digital Art. There is lots of information on the discipline accessible on the internet.
Digital photography and image manipulation is now a well accepted art form, but should photographic images produced by AI be considered in the same way? I don't think they should.
You're welcome!I am delighted and honored to hear from (well, read) so many influential authorities on art on this forum.
You're welcome!
You know, for the price of a return flight, several days in an appropriately appointed hotel/spa and $5,000.00 in gratuities, I'd be willing to share my hard won wisdom with you and several hundred of your friends willing purchase a ticket ($99.99) to my talk.
You, my friend, may attend for free!
Mayonnaise is in the eye of the beholder.
Once you have a yes or no answer, then what?
I don't expect to get a yes or no answer, as this thread shows.
I put Mayonnaise on salads, not in my eye.
What have you learned, though? Has any of it changed your view?
P.S. There was a famous experiment at Bell Labs decades ago where grammatically correct English sentences with meaning were put into a nonsense generator program that emitted grammatically correct English that was utter gibberish. The team then published the results on USENET (a precursor to the internet) and said it was a new work from Jaques Derridas, the Deconstructionist Philosopher. People were so excited about this new "work" that, apparently, Ph.D. dissertations were considering analyzing it. Apparently, the gibberish closely mirrored Derrida's actual writing. Ideas matter. Words matter. Grammar matters.
I put Mayonnaise on salads, not in my eye.
Perhaps it is performance art.Mayonnaise is in the eye of the beholder.
Rob Pike from Bell Labs told that story at a USENIX conference in Boston back in the late 1990s and had a room full of engineers roaring laughing.Id like to read more about this famous experiment, but I can’t find it on the internet. Do you have a link I can follow?
I agree that words have meanings and there needs to me some consensus on those meanings before a discussion that uses those words can take place. I know we can beat that dead horse of what “art” is but where I struggle is art vs. craft or art and craft. I’ve attended ”art festivals,” you know, with booths set up by vendors, and some of the wares offered is maybe “art” but some of it, to me, is just a demonstration of “craft.” I am mulling over that the product of AI may fall into that latter category.
Agreed. But some of that craft is gorgeous, and far beyond what I could ever do (in that field). Some very expensive pieces that are well worth the price! The skill it takes to make some of that is tremendous. (Edit to add - this comment has nothing to do with AI).
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?