Thread: Art and the postmodern: What is art?

Originally Posted by John Galt

Exactly, because I'm busier doing more productive things than filming myself on the crapper. If that's all you gleaned from that post, you missed the point entirely.


I would say it's in producing an accurate and comprehensible representation of your concept. Clowns crapping conveys... nothing at all.

I didnt miss the point, I'm just playing devils advocate to lead to more questions. I agree with you entirely, however the artist may argue that clowns crapping is an accurate and comprehensible representation of their concept and therefore the idea of whether or not it is art lies between the art and the viewer, as opposed to the idea which was almost unanimous in the "What is art" thread that it lies between art and artist. So I would ask you: does a piece become art if the artist sees it as such, or if the viewer accepts it as such?