this post was submitted on 19 Aug 2024
38 points (93.2% liked)
Casual UK
2180 readers
28 users here now
Casual UK
A casual place for banter and anything that doesn't fit in anywhere else.
Have chat and a natter. Talk about anything and everything.
Keep it casual.
Rules
- Be friendly.
- Be Kind.
- Follow Feddit.uk site rules.
Other communities:
Here:
Elsewhere:
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
One persons vandalism is another persons art.
No doubt if someone else claimed responsibility for it, it would already have been washed off.
Tagging or defacing a banksy is not "art". The art here can be appreciated by anyone, I think the idea is that the Gorilla opened the zoo and the animals are escaping, so the rest of London has the animals all over it
Right, so it makes no sense anywhere else.
Defining something as “art” or “not art” seems a rather simplistic worldview.
Does art need to be “appreciated by anyone” to be “art”, is art only what is popular, or simplistic enough to be understood by a mass audience?
Is stencilling over/tagging a banksy vandalism, or is it a making a statement on the middle class hypocrisy of its widespread acceptance of street works from one author and the derision of others?
Which of these are “art” or “not art”…
Seems like the rules for what is/isn’t art could be quite complicated. There would be endless possible scenarios to judicate on. Not to mention, who gets to decide? Popular vote, experts, the owner of the substrate?
Much simpler to let art be undefined and interpretable however one wishes.
Art is when it's nice