Comment by nerme | Hacker News Reader

Comment by nerme | Hacker News Reader

Parent Full thread

Phil·is·tine (fĭl'ĭ-stēn', fĭ-lĭs'tĭn, -tēn') n.

1.

A member of an Aegean people who settled ancient Philistia around the 12th century B.C.

2.

a. A smug, ignorant, especially middle-class person who is regarded as being indifferent or antagonistic to artistic and cultural values.

b. One who lacks knowledge in a specific area.

Dude, there is a WORLD of a difference between a computer application that is made for the purpose of doing business and a work of art...

Art is about communication. Art is a conversation.

Do you expect, when having a conversation with someone, that it is going to be a one-sided affair, where the other person is completely responsible for the outcome of the interaction, and you, yourself, have no bearing nor responsibility on the course of events?

Is someone "failing" at conversation because they are speaking to you in Korean and you don't understand it? Is that their fault? Or is it yours? Is one person failing and the other person triumphantly succeeding in this situation?

Isn't it important to define success conditions before throwing around words like "failure"? Usually it's considered two or more people "fail at conversation" if they don't manage to:

1) understand what others are trying to convey

2) make others understand what they're trying to convey

Even given that definition, it's questionable whether the listener or the speaker failed, if the listener does not understand the speaker's language. Was it acceptable to expect the listener to understand it?

Without going into any further details, my point is that I think your metaphor is inadequate, basically because it implies that the artist's intention is invariable to have his or her art appreciated by as many people as possible.

Two generations of people understood the conversation of Jazz. So yes, it is reasonable to expect another generation to also participate in that conversation. Unfortunately, that new generation has lost something.

Where did you learn that? To me, art is about experiencing things, not "conversation". Art mostly just sits there to be seen or heard, and it will not care about my saying or thinking. Art may "talk" to me, but I can't talk to art.

To your language analogy: what if I invent a language of my own and try to use it anywhere, how much the failure of communication is divided between me and the receivers? Many times "art" seems to be exactly this. It's not "Korean", it's just some gibberish the artist came up with.

If you're not making art, you're not taking part in the conversation.

However, you CAN learn the language, and then at least listen in on the conversation.

There is a reason that those paintings are hanging on the walls of museums like MoMA. The artists have engaged with the discourse of contemporary art of their time.

I could spend then next 6 weeks going over art history, but here's a quick example of the kinds of things that motivated artists in the beginning of the 20th century.

Before the advent of the photograph, the only way to capture a scene was by reproducing it by hand, using a number of different media. Once the ability to point a machine at a scene, capture, and print it was available, the working painters of the day had some serious questions to answer. What is being lost by taking a photograph? What is gained? What is the role of a painter? What can a painter do that a photographer can't?

With this context and these questions in mind, reexamine the course of art history in the latter part of the 19th century. You see a movement towards impressionism, the abstract, and expressionism.

Of course, technology is not the only motivator for an artist. There are philosophical trends and political events, that guide and inspire artists to create what they do.

I've found that my studies of the the history of various art forms, be them visual or aural, have greatly improved my understanding of how and why things are the way they are.

There is a lot to be gained by learning new ways of communication. I would push for everyone to not only learn the language, but partake in the conversation. The creation of art is truly a transcendent experience.

Is your last name Tolkein? Elvish is just some gibberish that he made up. I think that there is something profound and beautiful about creating your own language.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com