Why is art encouraged and supported by our society?

art is pittance i SPIT on art and its goes runny HA it costs a lot to keep it from all GETTING WASHED AWAY AHhahaha, restoration???
restoration?? whats the fucking point then!!! when every original brushstroke or material have been replaced what is it then? a grotesque inversion of the artists intent.. replaced piece by piece out of pure unconscious anonymous hivemind's devotion

>So art cannot be created on accident?
Well, you're here aren't you?

bassed and reedpiled

AND WHO ARE WE???

So...I'm art? woah.

literally

FUCK

>mfw this post is art.

Attached: lybch.jpg (555x380, 279K)

Art doesnt exist. It is the fabtication of the collective human conscience to want even things like literal shit on the pavement have meaning and value.

Attached: 1517544141893.jpg (1200x1707, 386K)

what has art EVER done for us

i made the church richer
and the rich immortalised

THANK you. finally, getting somewhere, let's get this ball rolling

Attached: 2ca596d970035729fcccfcbc022cb601.jpg (557x716, 111K)

>the collective human conscience

how do you know this exists, if art doesnt.

ART? get tae fuck

And an accident

IT WOULD BE A SHAME IF SOMEONE ACCIDENTALLY SQUIRTED THEIR CAPRI SUN IN THE WRONG DIRECTION

>Why is art encouraged and supported by our society?
The human brain likes patterns
>What is art?
Art is an act of controlling muscle movements in order to create a stimulating product. Art is most often based in rhythm - a "pulse" which, invariably, requires consistent discipline and the training of synapses in the brain. It is, in essence, the most difficult and noble pursuit in human history. Self-discipline creates, it does not destroy. It is a form of communicating ideas and feelings from one being to another, it separates man from animal. As Bruce Lee said, "I can show you a fancy trick, but to truly express oneself . . . that, my friend, is difficult." (There's a reason it's called martial arts) Our language, our society, our entire existence is based on art. Art creates letters, recognizable patterns which we interpret and use to communicate with each other. Art is what separates man from animal, proves the humanity of people of all cultures and creeds

BEAUTY IS TRUTH, TRUTH BEAUTY SIR

Art is fart.

okay that's all cool and humans are cool for doing that but they would be a lot cooler if they could let it go and deteriorate rather than clinging on, its a hoarding crisis - we can't afford it. yes, what people can do is wonderful- that isn't going to go away- but we don't have enough room to keep everything we make- we have to have a an actual functional reason

>would be a lot cooler if they could let it go and deteriorate rather than clinging on, its a hoarding crisis

Attached: giphy.gif (450x277, 925K)

we also need to stop loading value into some area's and depleting it from others

human potential is worse than occultly concealed to us- and space we have to employ it is even more limited and reliant on terms and conditions- art is something that relies on terms and conditions to be identified - and the same elements that are selected as the value within a piece of art could be the same thing, or a portion of, what is happening through someone raising their child

this is what i had in mind, thank you user!!

it feels SO GOOD to have that SELF DISCIPLINE to LET GO and KNOW THE SAME POTENTIAL EXISTS and there is ALWAYS MORE TO COME

Attached: DoowHNJWwAAZZgS.jpg (1200x1150, 166K)

before anyone says it: rendered and animated thought forms and tulpa's are a different story entirely

>an actual, functional reason
What is communication?
What is discipline?
What is ingenuity and inventiveness?
How have these things aided humanity and what value do these things have?
Answer those questions and you will understand.

Thank you based user for understanding my argument

we're the same user btw

i did understand it, i appreciated it, you almost got me... but it wasn't complete- you tell only as far as you've read the story and been lead to believe where it ends. the logical conclusion to art is based on the fundamental values imbued in it- but the conclusion of art undermines every value invested from the moment of conception UNLESSit is made by people who MAKE ART TO MAKE MONEY >:O

the self discipline those monks are demonstrating is exceptionally valuable and would be more functional and useful to society than preserving art.
we literally have no need for the institution of art- the crux: we do not need art as a concept to define things. the only function that serves is to feed into the capitalisation of it all

categorising a shoe painted gold entitled "hannah" and giving it a back story generates $20 million

a father teaching his 3 year old any given thing at any given time goes unnoticed, uncelebrated, unnoticed- which is fine, that isn't happening to be noticed, that isn't happening to make money, or make people think- but it's inherently invaluable.

when people talk about "art" and what it means, and is, their argument is that it's capturing inherent value, showing us it

we are fucking blind if we can't see that beauty otherwise
and we are fucking blind because people really arent see THAT in art.. art is artifice. anima is anima

sigh. fuck english, too. "ings" are fucking annoying, why do they exist

i don't care how much you love and enjoy and get turned on and hyped up by art.
look at this painting. its exquisite. i can live without it though. what i can't live without is the scenes on this planet earth that inspire and are depicted in these renditions

Look at this painting, the Isle of the Dead. I only need to tell you that a father painted this for his infant daughter who passed away- Please research it, and let it really make you think.

Very little need be preserved... and the will of the artist is bond.

Attached: display_image.jpg (2103x1140, 644K)

>i did understand it, i appreciated it, you almost got me... but it wasn't complete- you tell only as far as you've read the story and been lead to believe where it ends. the logical conclusion to art is based on the fundamental values imbued in it- but the conclusion of art undermines every value invested from the moment of conception UNLESSit is made by people who MAKE ART TO MAKE MONEY >:O
I'm trying to follow what you're saying but you're half-assing a metaphor. Art isn't only valuable to those who make money off of it - most literary, auditory, and visual artists of notable influence had/have little revenue generated.
>the self discipline those monks are demonstrating is exceptionally valuable and would be more functional and useful to society than preserving art.
Preservation of art is not the topic of discussion. However, archetecture is a form of art. We literally preserve art by living within it. You have to be specific on what the fuck you mean by "preserving" art. We could literally save all visual, auditory and literary art on servers for the rest of human history without running into a "hoarding" issue.
>we literally have no need for the institution of art- the crux: we do not need art as a concept to define things. the only function that serves is to feed into the capitalisation of it all
Letters are designs created by artists - there is a need for the use of letters. Writing - there is a use for its institution. Music, archetecture, martial arts, etc. All have functional uses well beyond capital. If you think capital is the purpose of art, you are unfamiliar with the use of art amongst oppressed people (harlem renaissance), as a tool for oppression (all nations during WWII), as a tool for protection (martial arts), as a tool for survival (archetecture), as a tool for technology (design)
Art existed before money. Its use to generate revenue is just that - a use.

fuck i posted two posts in one im an idiot. fuck it.

this was the first painting talked about, it's just a basic painting

Attached: 2a6f3e5cde01a5f54136c34a500d5e43--forest-art-moon-art.jpg (474x572, 44K)

tl;dr

not trying to cause offence this is just literally a pointless discussion, and i am already correct in entirety.

actually reading this now because - ... i'm interested , you got me, great, can't wait to get fried up and have lemon squeezed over me

Okay, here's the tl;dr version
>tl;dr you're not just wrong, you're a faggot

ok i literally could not finish that, it was too long, and actually kind of rude.

Nowdays people love to jerk off to individualism.

look
>
U're the faggot.
& that's something you needed to know.
normally
i'd be demanding that you pay me for the courtesy of providing such valuable insight.

LIsten.
>
ART is a fucking word mate. its a fucking category. people aren't artists as a species, they might be pretentious as a species, though
pretentious and WASTEFUL af

>kind of rude
>Posts this

I'm good, we're not even talking on remotely the same level at this point.

sweet.
give me a call when you get on my level. i don't think you can actually see my point.

>I don't think you can actually see my point
Perhaps make a cogent point, instead of disingenuously making a thread asking a rhetorical question to yourself. That way, there's no room for misinterpretation of argument.

>mfw art is changing the world and inspiring people to be all they can be and bring out all the beauty in life, making this world EXCELLENT

Attached: ww.jpg (480x360, 16K)

I didn't start the fire, it was always burning since the world's been turning.
I'm also not OP

Just as I thought, lacks cogence.
Try again when you're intellectually on par. Toodles nigga

>tfw art is tom hanks in the movie "the terminal"

>tfw art can't destroy art because it's art and people think it's art

*screws eyes shut and wildly stabs*

Attached: 7DsA.gif (600x338, 1.58M)

wrong gif
>You have been muted for 1 minute 4 seconds, because your comment was not original.
knowing i'm not the only one to have done this. comfy

Attached: tumblr_mtdvvdoaxF1qiclz0o1_500.gif (459x356, 492K)

just the type of mindset i'd expect from someone who values art

art is a cage :< in a cage fight

>values
>"one's judgment of what is important in life." (Dictionary)
Careful you don't pull something with all that reaching

>just the type of mindset i'd expect from someone who values art

um. i'd have thought someone who literally just said what art is would not have that mindset. odd.

>tvvsfw people use the faculty of mind that perceives arts transmissions only when you're socially assured that what they're witnessing is art

*they're

i am going to bed. this is ridiculous. let myself be trolled tae fuck. noone falls for this art shit anymore

well i'm staying awake. you go sleep. i'll keep watch.

Attached: a80d6aa73ff9015f70efbccdcf5ac517.jpg (474x679, 51K)

It's actually really vague, pretty much any form of expression can qualify as art and there's tons of pieces and even entire movements examining just that. Often the irony of pieces which critique the precived value of art seems to be lost on art collectors who then pay exorbitant amounts for a piece of actual garbage and that act of buying it is in fact intended to be part of the piece. Visual art at it's best can capture ideas and feelings too large or complicated to accurately be expressed in words or taps into something bordering on universal to inspire emotion but the art world is also full of circle jerking bullshit. The greatest example of this to me is the some of the aforementioned art which is a commentary of art, things like incredibly abstract paintings which are neither visually appealing nor expresses anything in and of themselves whos value qnd meaning lies purely in technique and context which requires foreknowledge of the medium, the art world, and to have be living in that particular period draw anything from. It seem to me such things are only remembered and considered worthwhile becuase art critics of the time who possessed such foreknowledge appreciated them and as "authorities" ultimately passed their judgments into the public consciousness and history where it's perpetuated by students and teachers of art.