Expanding the word "Art"

I believe the word "art" is becoming a broader term as time goes on. "Art" no longer solely refers to paintings and sculptures. Art has expanded to include photography, graffiti, abstract sketches, and more. But now it’s 2018, and digital media, the evolving monster, continues to grow. Now, things like Instagram profiles and blogs on Tumblr are becoming somewhat reminiscent of works of art, at least in the world of the internet. Many internet-lovers refer to these "artistic" accounts as having an "aesthetic."

I do think these aesthetically pleasing accounts have artistic qualities about them, but is it right to consider this art? Does the internet and social media change the ways in which we perceive art? Does social media create limitations or opportunities for art and the definition of art itself?

  • a great place to start for whoever may choose this topic is Roger Scruton's "Why Beauty Matters." In it Scruton argues that there are certain parameters that have been and should be set on what is considered "art," as well as who can and should be considered an artist. He discusses what he sees as the breaking points in the artistic world which lead to art deviating from what he considers to be the true purpose of art. Since this topic asks to consider what should and should not fall into the category of art, as well as changes in artistic perception, it seems like Scruton's work would be an ideal place to start when considering the issues presented in this topic. – ees 4 years ago
  • I think there can be and often is a distinction between Art and something that is simply aesthetically pleasing. Patterns on carpets, cushions and neckties can be aesthetically pleasing, but I think we'd seldom call them Art. Although ultimately whether something is Art is in the eye/ear of the beholder, for me Art has to convey something of the human condition, however abstract. It should resonate personally with the beholder at some deeper level. The Scruton documentary is interesting. I have a bit of a connection with it in that it uses some of my music (the music that starts at around 48:55 is mine, you can hear the full track here: https://soundcloud.com/broomoid/annotations-iii-closing ). Ironically, I fairly strongly disagree with his central premise that contemporary Art is not concerned with beauty. I think Scruton presents an idea of beauty which is very narrow in scope indeed, and anything that falls outside it is discounted as not worthy of consideration. But the idea that contemporary artists by and large do not concern themselves with balance, with composition, with tone, line, weight, texture and with the same artistic rigour as earlier artists, albeit applied in markedly different ways, is simply not true. I believe the best sort of discussion about Art ideally opens some additional doors to those that partake, but I believe that in his documentary Scruton is closing more doors than he is opening, and that's a missed opportunity. – Broomoid 4 years ago

Want to write about Arts or other art forms?

Create writer account