Roman,
A creative endeaver where one is trying to be as sensitive as possible to what is going on, attempting to take the given materials to the highest order of assemblage per a certain design initiative, being original, assembling all the parts, pieces, and colors with the thought to make something aesthetically tireless for the allowable ages; then why not call it art, if the word speaks of some kind of further contribution beyond being solely a copy cat technician (with all due respect). What's the hangup? Probably sticking my neck out here, but I venture to say that it may take some mental maturity to understand that what you are doing is art, or maybe what you can be doing is art.
Dennis Young Hotaka, Japan
> What comes to mind here is that we're getting to a point in this
> discussion
> where any thing anyone likes is "art" - even if the creator of the
> object
> didn't even think of it that way.
>
> The more examples of this I see, the more bogus the whole notion
> seems. At
> what point does every nicely designed thing become art?
>
> It seems that one could compile an endless list or finely designed and
> crafted objects that serve a primarily functional purpose in life. The
> creators of these objects are typically fine designers/craftsmen
> and may
> have been influenced by many stylistic and/or artistic movements in
> the
> development of their own personal styles. Most of them don't consider
> themselves as artists and most don't think they make art. What do
> we know
> that they don't that we need to label these things as art?
>
> I just don't get it. The art of .......... take your pick. I don't
> see it.
>
> "What's art got to do with it?"
>
> Roman Stankus
> Atlanta, Ga.