So what is it?
The argument ensued about art being used solely to make millions. That people are genuinely dumb and will accept anything as art as long as its wild enough. Human urine, menstrual blood, butter.
Its a little daunting to think that most people will accept anything as ART and not consider asking any questions about its creation. Is there a purpose? Does there need to be one?
Many of my talented artist friends become frustrated with the idea that what they create needs to send some powerful message. They simply are unable to create something beautiful just because they enjoy its beauty. Are consumers of art more focused on a purpose? Is it some intellectual elite stigma that has been imposed upon the art world where everything has some deep meaning and only those wise enough to discover it are truly appreciative of art? This seems far from fair.
What about performance art and commercial art? What about the artists' intentions? Is looking to make money a valid reason to appreciate and value an artists' work? If not, then shouldn't we go back and take many famous art forms from the textbooks that were created on church commissions or king's requests?
I think the definition of ART will continue to be undefined for quite some time. There's so many viewpoints to take and too many art forms to try to define. Regardless, of the menacing question "what is art", I enjoyed discussing and learning the many perspectives to this.
So what are yours? Discuss. Listen. Share with me.