Tom dinning
Registrant*
Art in the imagination or the image - (Originally posted in "The Human Form As Art")
I don't see the human body as art. It's too functional for that. As for the photograph. Well, sometimes we may assume the image is artistic or 'arty farty'. But the image is just that; an image. If the intent of the artist is to be artistic, who is to judge whether there has Ben a measure of success? And if it fails do we still consider the form to be art? Head as art. Does that leave me with a sense of artistic inadequacy? No. Just a deflating sense of disappointment.
All this is giving me a head ache. If I look in the mirror I don't see any part of me that would or should be photograph.
I don't see the human body as art. It's too functional for that. As for the photograph. Well, sometimes we may assume the image is artistic or 'arty farty'. But the image is just that; an image. If the intent of the artist is to be artistic, who is to judge whether there has Ben a measure of success? And if it fails do we still consider the form to be art? Head as art. Does that leave me with a sense of artistic inadequacy? No. Just a deflating sense of disappointment.
All this is giving me a head ache. If I look in the mirror I don't see any part of me that would or should be photograph.
Last edited by a moderator: