Instigator / Pro
0
1500
rating
2
debates
25.0%
won
Topic
#5265
You choose the topic
Status
Finished
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
Winner & statistics
After not so many votes...
It's a tie!
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 5
- Time for argument
- Three days
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Winner selection
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Con
0
1494
rating
17
debates
35.29%
won
Description
You choose the topic.
Round 1
You choose the debate that I have to defend.
You must convince the judges that:
Art is for the audience. Art is ultimately a form of communication.
I must convince the judges that:
Art is for the Artist. Art is ultimately a form of introspection.
I will start my argument off with a quote from Ad Reinhardt:
"Art is an attempt to balance the conscious and unconscious."
Round 2
Thank you for accepting.
What is art?
This is from the Oxford Dictionary.
the expression or application of human creative skill and imagination, typically in a visual form such as painting or sculpture, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power.
Let’s look at the producing works part. It states how is produces works to be appreciated for their beauty or emotional power. This proves that it is to be made for the audience, to appreciate the art in its beauty.
Motivation
Let’s pretend you are an up and coming artist. So you spend a month on a painting. Once you are done you see a similar artist who looks much happier and is known across the town for their paintings. This will surely put a downer on your motivation to see someone do better than you.
Examples
Let’s look at one of, if not the, most famous painting on Earth, The Mona Lisa. Around 10 million people visit it each year. artsandculture.google.com/story/6-of-the-world-39-s-most-visited-paintings/sAVhFizZbAwNJA?hl=en#
This was made by Leonardo Da Vinci. It was made between 1503 and 1519 and was gifted to the French Goverment by him. If it was true that art was made for the person, then why did he give them the painting? If art was made for the artist, it would make no sense to give it away.
Another example would be Girl With A Pearl Earring. This currently sits in The Mauritshuis. Once again, it was sold to someone who put it in a museum. If art was truly made for the artist, then why was it sold?
This is my first argument so I hope you understand what I wrote.
The Merriam Webster dictionary defines art as:
the conscious use of skill and creative imagination especially in the production of aesthetic objects.also : works so produced.
This definition of art does not dictate that art requires an audience.
First point:
Good art = big money. Right? Wrong. Most artists, even highly talented ones, are relatively poor. So why do they do it?
It's because artists have a passion. So while it is true that external factors can affect an artist's motivation, passion doesn't die.
One of the main things that all artists have in common is that they enjoy making art.
Thus, art is for the artist.
Second point:
I noticed that you brought up the Mona Lisa:
This (the Mona Lisa) was made by Leonardo Da Vinci. It was made between 1503 and 1519 and was gifted to the French Government by him. If it was true that art was made for the person, then why did he give them the painting? If art was made for the artist, it would make no sense to give it away.
why would Leonardo Da Vinci give the Mona Lisa to French royalty?
- It was not a gift, the Mona Lisa was actually purchased by King Francis. Leonardo Da Vinci needed the money. (link)
Third point:
Did you know that Leanardo Da Vinci would just leave his work unfinished? Once he was no longer interested in something, he would move onto his next project.
Leanardo Da Vinci would follow his heart, because Leanardo Da Vinci didn't make his paintings for museums.
Leanardo Da Vinci made art for himself.
You will see this pattern repeated in every great artist.
True artistic geniuses don't think about the audience.
True artistic geniuses follow their creativity.
Round 3
This definition of art does not dictate that art requires an audience.
While this may be true that it doesn’t support my argument, it doesn’t support your either. Because it doesn’t mention either of our sides.
I would add more but have been busy lately and don’t have time to.
The Merriam Webster dictionary defines art as:
the conscious use of skill and creative imagination especially in the production of aesthetic objects.also : works so produced.
You said:
While this may be true that it doesn’t support my argument, it doesn’t support your either. Because it doesn’t mention either of our sides.
Merriam Webster's definition of art doesn't mention anything about the audience, but it does dictate that art needs a conscious creator.
With hundreds of lexicographers tasked with working on the Merriam Webster dictionary, this was not a mistake.
Put simply, art needs a creator, but not necessarily an audience. How does that not support my claim?
another point:
I recently learned that Leonardo Da Vinci used invisible brushstrokes in his paintings. (link)
Have you ever seen an invisible brushstroke? No, but painters still put that extra level of perfection into their pieces.
So why do artists fixate on details that almost no one will notice? It's because the artist notices. Thus, art is for the artist.
Round 4
I recently learned that Leonardo Da Vinci used invisible brushstrokes in his paintings. (link)Have you ever seen an invisible brushstroke? No, but painters still put that extra level of perfection into their pieces.So why do artists fixate on details that almost no one will notice? It's because the artist notices. Thus, art is for the artist.
While this is surely interesting this does not point out that it is for the artist for one reason. If this invisible brush lines were for the artist, then how did we find out about them? Because we paid attention to the art. We, the audience, enjoyed the price so much we found that out.
Put simply, art needs a creator, but not necessarily an audience. How does that not support my claim?
Anything needs a creator. In order for art to exist, it does need someone to create it. But that person could have created for the audience to enjoy.
Your claim is that Art is for the audience. This is sometimes true.
Art is sometimes made with the audience in mind.
My claim is that Art is for the artist. This is always true.
Artists spill their deepest thoughts and emotions into all of their work.
You cannot create art without discovering something about yourself.
Here is a quote from Andy Warhol:
Don't think about making art, just get it done. Let everyone else decide if it's good or bad, whether they love it or hate it. While they are deciding, make even more art.
Round 5
Forfeited
I rest my case.