What is your definition of art?/why do you consider video games and movies art?

[jimahaff]

I have never heard art defined. Ever, and whenever I ask an artist they always\without fail give me a really weird answer that doesn't really click with me.

So I created my own definition of art; Art is any self expression of emotion through media. To me art is for the benefit of the artist, and if anyone else gets something out of it that's great. If it means something to to person who made it, congratulations it's art.

This is pretty much my way of saying I really don't get some of the things that people consider Art, and that's ok because it doesn't matter if I "get" it. However this leaves me in a predicament; video games and movies are made by very large groups of people. And at the end of the day, what does a finished video game mean to one of the people that worked on it. Sure it represents months if not years of hard work, sweat and tears. But does it have a personal enough meaning to pass my definition of art? The same can be said of movies; so there must be something missing in my definition of art.

So here I am trying to expand my definition of art, to rationalize video games and movies as art.

So what is your definition of art, what is included in that, what isn't. Do you consider your self an artist? Why? What makes a person an artist?

Edit

Also is art subjective? Can something be art to one person, but not to another? Or does one person thinking something is art, qualify it as art forever?

 

[NegaWiki]

However this leaves me in a predicament; video games and movies are made by very large groups of people. And at the end of the day, what does a finished video game mean to one of the people that worked on it. Sure it represents months if not years of hard work, sweat and tears. But does it have a personal enough meaning to pass my definition of art? The same can be said of movies; so there must be something missing in my definition of art.

I saw an episode of the The Simpsons where they parody Oceans 11 by making a collaborative book. Is it still a book? It still has a central message (I made a book for money)but should it be counted as a work of art?

Yes, the original meaning of art is a special faculty of the human mind to be classified with religion and science, obviously the meaning will change dramatically and will continue to change with time.
Movies and video games are collaborative art.

 

[Mrrrgggrlllrrrg]

I maintain that art is subjective to the viewer, what is considered art by a supposed committee could be considered trash by a random viewer.

But it is not a subjective question you asked, what is the definition of art? Well lets bust out ye olde dictionary;

"The conscious production or arrangement of sounds, colours, forms, movements, or other elements in a manner that affects the sense of beauty, specifically the production of the beautiful in a graphic or plastic medium."

Everything in this world that is made could be considered art, from cheap plastic toys to the greatest monument to human engineering and everything in between.

 

[Shymer]

Art is the application or expression of human creativity through the deliberate arrangement of items* that can be experienced through one or more of the human senses.

*Here my language fails me - I mean item in the widest sense of real or virtual elemental 'thing' that may somehow may be perceived by others.

This definition does not imply that the creativity that is employed need come from only one person. There are many examples of people collaborating on art - so many that it almost becomes 'obvious'.

From this perspective, video games are artistic endeavours, usually collaborative.

It is perhaps harder to define what constitutes good art. Clearly factors such as the amount of time taken to create a work, the skill involved, the resultant quality/detail/fidelity and how satisfying the work is to the person experiencing it are factors. However appreciating art is a very personal experience. One man's Portal is another man's Duke Nuke'Em Forever...

Art need not be to send a message, or tell a story - although these are important to certain works, it is not generally necessary. A lot of recent contemporary game criticism that speaks about games as an art form (dare I say Extra Credits?) might confuse people into conflating 'good art' with 'message'.

Take 'Peggle' or 'Plants vs Zombies' for example. Games with no pretentions of 'message', but which are hugely enjoyable. Are they art? Are they good art? Are they good games? I would argue they are both works of art, both laudable for their quality and both good video games. However, like many video games, they don't perhaps need or aspire to the weightiness of some other artistic endeavours (like novels, films or sculpture) and so some of the literary crowd might poo-poo them as puerile. That may be the case, but they are enjoyed by hundreds of thousands of people and that makes them worthy.

 

[jimahaff]

Yes, the original meaning of art is a special faculty of the human mind to be classified with religion and science, obviously the meaning will change dramatically and will continue to change with time.
Movies and video games are collaborative art.

I am not saying that they are not art, I view both video games and movies as art, I am just trying to change my definition of art to accommodate that view.

"The conscious production or arrangement of sounds, colours, forms, movements, or other elements in a manner that affects the sense of beauty, specifically the production of the beautiful in a graphic or plastic medium."

Basically if one person thinks its pretty... it's art. That is not very helpful and is exactly what I was talking about when I said I never get straight answers to this question. But the definition of beauty equals art doesn't really fit with me. There has got to be more to it than that. Something about causing the viewer to feel emotion or having a personal meaning for the person who created it needs to be added(in my humble opinion).

Sigh... maybe I am idealizing art.... Art is the ideal, and the fact that I can idealize it depresses me. But please keep the opinions coming I would really love to start a huge debate about a better definition of art, and where you drawl the lines, and exclude something from being art.

Edit

Art is the application or expression of human creativity through the deliberate arrangement of items* that can be experienced through one or more of the human senses.

I like that a lot, Can I steal it?

However appreciating art is a very personal experience. One man's Portal is another man's Duke Nuke'Em Forever...

Also true, Maybe I have just been focusing on my personal definition of art.... What has meaning to me, and what I value as art.

 

[Flailing Escapist]

Fun. If its fun to look at, read or play or if it makes me think (more than usual and thats fun) its art to me.

 

[Voonhartking]

To me art is something that uses aesthetics to convey a message, emotion, or idea. To me that's what video games do by definition. The mere act of playing a game changes your outlook of the world that surrounds you. If a video game can't convey an idea or an emotion on the smallest of levels then it's failed as a video game. So any well made video game can be considered art.

 

[MrLumber]

Personally its not the expression of emotion, but the ability to evoke emotion in an audience.

On the topic of a collective effort (movies, games, etc.) usually its up to the people in charge of any given department involved to be able to get their work to an artistic level. What I mean by that is a movie can have amazing visuals, but a weak story. If those visuals are powerful enough to stir the viewer than that portion of the film is of artistic value.

I don't like the argument that fun things are art personally, because simple inane things can be fun.

 

[Something Amyss]

I saw an episode of the The Simpsons where they parody Oceans 11 by making a collaborative book. Is it still a book? It still has a central message (I made a book for money)but should it be counted as a work of art?

There are actual books like this, done by collaboration. Sometimes several people.

 

[BlackWidower]

Art is anything that requires creativity to produce, and is not simply a logical progression of evidence to create what is required.

So this is pretty broad, but that's exactly what I think a definition like this needs to be. Otherwise you get someone who qualifies only what they do as art, and everything else as not-art, which would be proof they have their head up their ass.

So this would set most games as art because they have stories that required someone to make up out of almost nothing. They have character designers and illustrators doing the same thing. It's very creative, which makes it art.

The only exception is games which strive for realism. If you go for 100% realism, you are just copy-pasting what already exists and are making up nothing. It's not art.

So I guess MS Flight Sim would qualify. But some may point out Call of Duty, but to a certain extent, the maps are original...right?

 

[JesterRaiin]

So I created my own definition of art; Art is any self expression of emotion through media.

Every work of fiction, every crossover, incest/wincest/freakcest, Harry Potter meets Naruto fits this description.

 

[Mrrrgggrlllrrrg]

"The conscious production or arrangement of sounds, colours, forms, movements, or other elements in a manner that affects the sense of beauty, specifically the production of the beautiful in a graphic or plastic medium."

Basically if one person thinks its pretty... it's art. That is not very helpful and is exactly what I was talking about when I said I never get straight answers to this question. But the definition of beauty equals art doesn't really fit with me. There has got to be more to it than that. Something about causing the viewer to feel emotion or having a personal meaning for the person who created it needs to be added(in my humble opinion).

Now this is where the prejudice comes in, beauty is another subjective trait like art, what is beautiful to someone may be abhorrent to another.

Beauty is that which pleases by merely being perceived.

Every single person has prejudices and how they manifest is rather fascinating to me at least. So what do you think?

 

[repeating integers]

So I created my own definition of art; Art is any self expression of emotion through media.

Every work of fiction, every crossover, incest/wincest/freakcest, Harry Potter meets Naruto fits this description.

Who says the definition of "art" must include "good"? There can be bad art too.

 

[JesterRaiin]

So I created my own definition of art; Art is any self expression of emotion through media.

Every work of fiction, every crossover, incest/wincest/freakcest, Harry Potter meets Naruto fits this description.

Who says the definition of "art" must include "good"? There can be bad art too.

If so, then everything and anything should be considered art. Good, bad or ugly but still "art".

 

[repeating integers]

So I created my own definition of art; Art is any self expression of emotion through media.

Every work of fiction, every crossover, incest/wincest/freakcest, Harry Potter meets Naruto fits this description.

Who says the definition of "art" must include "good"? There can be bad art too.

If so, then everything and anything should be considered art. Good, bad or ugly but still "art".

And this is why I don't waste my time trying to define art. 'Tis an exercise in frustration, and really, it's a pointless term.

 

[babinro]

I consider art to be anything that makes me stop to appreciate it or reflect on more than what is simply being presented to me.

As such I consider anything from Video Games, Paintings, Music, the Sky, Craftsmanship and Cooked meals to be forms of art. My personal favorite of which is what nature provides us in natural surroundings and the sky.

 

[Pyramid Head]

Okay, this is getting fucking ridiculous. I know redundant topics aren't unusual, but this topic came up... what? Last week? Use your forum search!

 

[Hero in a half shell]

Art attempts to create an emotional response in his audience, and is very, very old. He is an aging poet, a writer, and a musician with a crazy ginger afro.
In short, this is art;

Spoiler: You thought I was being metaphorical there, didn't you

ART GARFUNKEL!

On a serious note, anything created by man with the purpose of creating an emotional response in the artist or viewer, is art. So literature is art, movies are art, poetry, videogames, painting, sculptures, etc. etc. etc.

Unfortunately, most of this is bad art. So bad it doesn't achieve any recognition as being art whatsoever. Of course occasionally some of this rubbish art somehow convinces everyone that it is good art. I think art can be reviewed and graded, through marking the technical skill of the piece, so I can objectively call something that took virtually no skill to make and that I can openly point out flaws and issues that would have improved the piece "bad art", because it is ill-refined and unremarkable.

 

[the rye]

For me art has to fulfill three criteria, it must have something meaningful to say, it must evoke an emotion in the audience, and it must have form.

Emotion by itself does not stand for art, the primary problem with this is that it reduces art to hedonism. It becomes superficial as we are only moved by emotion for the sake of being moved by emotion. A lot of art conveys truth, which requires the audience to not only behold the art but to contemplate it, thus upon the point of catharsis or the aesthetic experience they gain deeper knowledge of humanity, the self etc.

I've seen many claim art is what ever pushes their buttons, they avoid an works of art like The Odyssey, or Oedipus Rex which actually had something to say about mans place in the universe.

Furthermore remember art has intrinsic value not subjective value, it has aesthetic value regardless of subjective opinion.

 

[Canadamus Prime]

I don't know, but I do know one thing; if you have to justify it, it's not art.