Sorry, I Just Don't Get It.

[cosmicfolklore]

I too am always evolving my aesthetic. Many moons and hairstyle ago. Heck, when I had a full head of hair, I was fresh about my passion for art. And, what is known as Modern Art looked fresh and new to my eyes. I got excited over the concepts of Mondrian, Pollock, Kandinsky... Now, as I am much grayer of hair, these paintings look trite and poorly designed and poorly theorized in argument. They don't look modern to me. They look older, outdated, and my artistic value for them has dropped. So has my appreciation for guitar solos, being rude, and slutty women. We tend to evolve our aesthetics as we evolve in every other way. We may or may not think something is art one day, and "not art" latter on down the road.
Hmmmm, on second thought, it really depends on the individual slutty woman, ha ha!

 

[clickklick]

I hereby proclaim this thread, "One Pipe, Three Pages"

 

[cosmicfolklore]

I was thinking it could be called "to believe or not to believe in a pipe" that is the question.

 

[warren]

Anyone can objectively define anything to their satisfaction. Some will accept, some will not. There are many accepted definitions for the word "art" as general term. What is or is not considered art to an individual is and must be personal.
johnnyreb: I believe the 63 was when GM decided "no more sports car" and went with producing the grand touring model. I am definitely not a fan of the "Stingray."
So, you and I will have to have a few and discuss it one of these days. I'm looking forward to it. I will be very respectful of your opinion as you owned a real sports car.

 

[cosmicfolklore]

But by that very description it becomes subjective.

 

[cosmicfolklore]

Objectively, I can say it is 93 degrees fahrenheit outside.

That is unarguable. But, if i say it is hot outside, that is subjective.

To say that art is a culturally accepted medium used to evoke or communicate an idea, that is an attempt at objectivity. But, If posed with surveying an oil painted red canvas stretched over an 88 Vette to protect it from the sun, the objective becomes subjective to some... Or a roadside sign declaring peaches to be $1 in oil paint on the side of the road.

We can then only say that the definition was an objective attempt to define something that is subjective in nature.

 

[warren]

You got it! I fully believe that no person can look at anything in a totally objective manner. Humans have too much baggage. If someone suggests looking at something objectively, I will honestly and futilely strive do so. But, life experiences, personal biases, emotions, etc. all work against gaining the freedom of mind to assess anything objectively. As objectively as possible, maybe. Totally objectively? I think such is an impossibility.
I should temper my observation in that I am not talking about quantitative, numerical measurements and such. I am addressing perceptions. Although, after working in a hardware store, I did learn with plumbing that a 1/4 of an inch is not necessarily a 1/4 of an inch. Very confusing! My faith in my 7th math teacher was terribly shaken.
Humans accumulate and carry too much baggage to ever be able to be purely objective about most anything. If two people agree that something is beautiful, there are probably two very divergent opinions on why it is beautiful.
cosmic: Your last post was more succinct than mine (not hard to do of course) and spot on. I couldn't have said it better and didn't.

 

[cosmicfolklore]

That, I can throw an amen on.

 

[seacaptain]

The tangibility is a part of whether it can be objectively defined. It is easy to define something that can be held and identified easily as a pipe. It is much harder to define something that is a label of quality. Otherwise, it would be easy to dispel this whole thread, and we wouldn't be having this discussion.

Something tangible may be easier to objectively define but I'll still argue that intangibles can also be objectively defined.
I don't think anyone would define "love" as spitting in someones face. So, it may be more difficult to define love than a pipe, but we can certainly get there nonetheless by determining what love is, and what it is not.
Again, just to be clear, I understand there can be disagreements between people about specifics, but still I'd argue that everything has an objective measure, apart from disagreement or imperfect understanding.
To say about anything, tangible or intangible, that each of us can define what that thing means to us, and that we are inherently correct because individual perception itself determines the definition, ultimately deconstructs everything into meaninglessness.
There's a world of difference between asking - What does it mean? and - What does it mean to me?

 

[cosmicfolklore]

What a work means and defining the object as art are not the same thing. And, Please explain why it becomes meaningless?

I'm not convinced that you understand the discussion. This was about whether someone can think the pipe in the OP is art. It had nothing to do with the style or the meaning.

Honestly, I think we agree. You do not have to believe the pipe or the urinal are art. And, if someone says that you have to accept these as art, while I will disagree with you, I will defend your right to disagree. As to the meaning, well, that would make this a few more pages long, ha ha!

 

[johnnyreb]

johnnyreb: I believe the 63 was when GM decided "no more sports car" and went with producing the grand touring model. I am definitely not a fan of the "Stingray."

Jeez Warren, we're not talking about the 57 Ford Thunderbird here.
I have lots of pictures but none are digitized to load here. Cascade Green with Ivory cove & ivory interior, Ivory soft top & Cascade Green hardtop. 265 CI V8 with 2 x 4 barrels & 3 speed transmission. She was very artful!
A red 1962 fulie came next.

 

[warren]

Certain items may be accepted at face value and agreed upon. "Imperfect understanding" is phrase I like to use, even though it is sometimes or, in debates often, condescending. "What does it mean" will always elicit a subjective answer.
You may "objectively" define something to your satisfaction. The person to your left may see the item entirely different. Or, they may be blind and depend on your description, interpret your words and, coupled to an enhanced sense of touch, conjure up an entirely different impression from what you intended.
What I consider "art" may be diametrically opposed to your accepted (subjective?)definition. Some consider politics to be an art. Some people and universities believe it is a science. Still others consider politics to be out and out chicanery. It all depends on your perspective which comes from your experience with politics.
Some psychologists will tell you that what they practice is still far from a science and more of an art.
cosmic: Just for fun, after you assuredly assert that it is 93 degrees and someone goes outside, taps the thermometer and the needle drops one degree, what is your response? New thermometer? Or less assurance when stating the temp in the future. Such as "It looks to be tolerably hot out today." :D

 

[daimyo]

But regardless of the device measuring the temperature, there is a temperature despite any misunderstanding or miscalculation on our part... unless all of reality is merely a construct of my consciousness.

 

[gloucesterman]

Jonny, back in the late sixties I thought the '56 was the most beautiful car I had ever seen and to this day it still it pulls on my heart strings. A lot of the later Vettes were technically and mechanically superior but none were as classy. That was what was called a "Chick Magnet"!

 

[warren]

johnnyreb: Told ya! See! See! gloucesterman speaks heep truth!

 

[frozenchurchwarden]

daimyo:

But regardless of the device measuring the temperature, there is a temperature despite any misunderstanding or miscalculation on our part... unless all of reality is merely a construct of my consciousness.

So you did it! It's all your fault!
Now we know who to blame for everything.

 

[maxx]

John Cage - 4'33

[No link needed - you can perform this one by yourself]
A music professor told us of a lecture Cage gave that he attended (don't recall if they paid to attend). Cage approached the podium, placed a hand on each side, leaned forward, and starred at the audience silently for the allotted time. Some people sat quietly, some walked out shouting vituperations, some coughed, and so forth. At the end, applause broke out.
Incidentally, I sometimes enjoy Free Jazz, which can sound like the band room in high school before the teacher brings the class to attention.

 

[Chasing Embers]

Each person doesn't get to decide for himself what "pipe" means.

If that were true, the pipe that inspired this thread would not exist.

 

[johnnyreb]

Jonny, back in the late sixties I thought the '56 was the most beautiful car I had ever seen and to this day it still it pulls on my heart strings.

As an early member of NCRS when it was a restorers society for just straight axle Corvettes I bought the 56 in the 1970's to restore. I certainly believe the 1956-1957 model yrs are the pinnacle of the Zora Duntov straight axle era, & with the introduction of the 283 V8, 4 speed transmission, & the option of fuel injection in 1957 it was certainly the king.
But Chevrolet didn't abandon its sports car fan base in 1963 when they built the 5 Corvette Grand Sports (3 coupes, 2 roadsters) to go racing at LE Mans & compete against the AC Cobras among others, and introduced the Sting Ray era with the split window coupe by designer Larry Shinoda. The Sting Ray era were certainly beautiful cars. It is still being hotly debated by owners & enthusiasts as to whether the 1963 fuelie split window coupe or the 1967 coupe with the optional 427 CI engine with Tri-Power is the true pinnacle of that era.
OT & my apologies to the discussion on what is art. I'll stop now.

 

[troutface]

Does anyone else find it ironic that I have to debate the meaning of objectivity? :rof

Each individual doesn't get to decide for himself what Art Deco means.

Actually they do. There may be a general consensus of when Art Deco began, when it ended, and what stylistic details comprise it, but after that it's a free-for-all. It's a bell curve of opinion, not fact. And as Warren pointed out, the further one's opinion is from the middle of the curve, the more one is labeled as uneducated, stupid, etc. What each individual doesn't get to decide is at what temperature water boils at sea level. Never confuse general consensus with fact.
I would also like to add that I am enjoying this thread immensely and hopefully in good humor. I enjoy having my beliefs challenged, it sharpens the mind.