Thread: Art and the postmodern: What is art?

Sorry, I'm certainly not trying to beat you down. Your OP, in which you talked about "modernism" relating to the present and "post-modernism" relating to the future, made it seem like you didn't realize what those terms really meant.

At any rate, when I said I couldn't define art, I wasn't just trying to offer up an "official" answer, I was being personally honest. I don't think I can clearly articulate any definition of "art" that's satisfactory to myself. I'll think on this some more and get back to you if I come up with something, though. But I do stand by my earlier assertion that whatever art may be, I see no reason to suggest that "the post-modern works", as you put it, can't be called truly artistic.

Also, I hate to seem like I'm engaging in more jargon traps or whatever, but a lot of people would suggest that architecture and literature (along with music, film, etc.) are all forms of "art" along with painting and sculpture, which are what I presume you were thinking of when you stipulated postmodernism "in the art sense only". I am guessing you want only to talk about painting and sculpture?


EDIT: Okay, somewhat bizarrely, Wikipedia actually has a definition of 'art' that makes a bit of sense to me: "The process or product of deliberately arranging elements in a way that appeals to the senses or emotions". That comes reasonably close to my own ideas about what art is. Obviously this is extremely broad and would encompass music, architecture, literature, performance art, film, fashion, various sorts of visual design, and so on and so forth along with what are traditionally considered visual arts. That's not a problem for me, and as I mentioned above many people would agree that "art" includes all of these things and more, but it may be a bit more over-arching then what you are asking about.

2nd EDIT: Cooking would also be considered an art under that definition.