Orchestra kids don't get the whole smoking pot thing.
Did 19 miles up the hill and back at an average speed of 17.6 mph.
I still got it, baby. Still got it.
Before that I did a small plumbing job at Noel's house down the street. I'm going back tomorrow to fix a shower faucet. I enjoy talking with people, learning their story. He spent his life as a court recorder, but for a private firm he and two other guys started up in Minneapolis. When he retired it was the largest court reporter firm between Chicago and L.A.
I read an article on Slate this morning about an art exhibit in NYC that's nothing but art that isn't art anymore. Paintings, ceramics, sculptures - all items that were insured, got damaged somehow, and got totalled by the insurance company. The curator who put together this exhibit worked with the insurance companies to get these pieces on loan from the warehouses where they're stored. (It didn't explain why the insurance companies don't just throw them out.)
The article was pretty boring, which seemed like a waste of an idea that could have been interesting. But the author is an artist, not a normal person, so that's probably why. For him this was about items with a kind of aura or something that had been damaged, lost their soul. Huh?
One line did catch my attention. He asked if something ceases to be art if it loses all monetary value - never mind that it got smashed up. And that made me think of the opposite question: is something art just because if has a high monetary value? Call it art, put a $50,000 tag on it, and is it art?
Say I painted a picture of an object we see every day - a soup can, for example - and figured out a way to convince people to pay me stupid money for it, would it therefore be art?
And is something not art if it lacks any monetary value?
What if the value of an object changes dramatically over a stretch of time, either rising or falling significantly. Is it more or less art?
Some of the great classical musicians, painters and sculptors died penniless because their work wasn't deemed worthwhile. Now I listen to those composers on Pandora and read about the rest on Wikipedia.
Is there an objective definition for what constitutes art? If there is it certainly isn't based on monetary value. That simply doesn't work. So do we rely on what the experts tell us is art? 'cause they're the ones who sold us pictures of soup cans.
Does a Christian world view, informed by the Bible, having anything to contribute to the discussion?
1 comment:
Just thinkin' out loud here:
An object's worth is defined by the price paid for it. It may be obviously or seemingly worthless, but if someone pays a heavy price for it, then it has been made worth that amount.
"The ransom of a man's life is his riches." -Proverbs
We've been ascribed the worth of the ransom paid for us.
"For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life a ransom for many."
Post a Comment