QUOTE: Originally posted by SpaceMouse Mark B, While I hear you saying that because a model railroad moves, I'm going to make the assumption that what you mean is that the model railroad is interactive. Certainly there are many forms of art that move. ..... Last year at a local art show, a chair won Best of Show. Was it art when it was in the gallery but now that it is being sat upon just a chair?
Mark P.
Website: http://www.thecbandqinwyoming.comVideos: https://www.youtube.com/user/mabrunton
QUOTE: http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=art
http://mprailway.blogspot.com
"The first transition era - wood to steel!"
QUOTE: Originally posted by SpaceMouse [ Frank Lloyd Wright did not do anything new. People have been building houses for millinia. He just did it so that people took notice.
Have fun with your trains
Chip
Building the Rock Ridge Railroad with the slowest construction crew west of the Pecos.
QUOTE: Originally posted by SpaceMouse Brakie, Are you saying that to be art it has to have resale value?
Larry
Conductor.
Summerset Ry.
"Stay Alert, Don't get hurt Safety First!"
QUOTE: Unless I am sadly mistaken 99.9% of the artist sell their painting either professionally or at local craft shows/sales.I seen a few paintings at community yard sales and other fund raisers. Think of this as common sense..If amateur artist didn't sell their paintings they would soon have a house full of paintings..
QUOTE: Originally posted by Brunton Well, Chip, I didn't say art couldn't be funtional; I said it's purpose is to exist. There's all sorts of art that can be used for other things. Does a painting become something not art just because it is used to cover a crack in the plaster? Of course not. If someone makes a shaker-style chair and pronounces "I deem this art," does it become art or is it still just a chair? The paintings on a chair may be art, or a sculpture of a chair may be art, but a sculptured chair, while perhaps very artfully done, is still a chair. What would you define as not art? I'm beginning to get the impression that you consider pretty much anything man-made as art. Is a towel with an embroidered pattern on it art? Is the color scheme on a locomotive art? Is the painted hull of a supertanker art? What is not art?
QUOTE: Originally posted by marknewton By "light rail", do you mean tramways/streetcars?
QUOTE: There's lot's of interest in modelling those. And most of them run much shorter headways than 20 minutes. My local operator runs on 90 second headways in peak hours, 5 to 7 minutes at other times... If that was my modelling goal, then yes, it would keep me interested.
QUOTE: Originally posted by rripperger I mean, a velvet Yoda is bad, but I wouldn't go so far as to say it isn't art.
QUOTE: Originally posted by vsmith QUOTE: Originally posted by rripperger I mean, a velvet Yoda is bad, but I wouldn't go so far as to say it isn't art. "and if my grandmother had wheels, she'd be a wagon" ...Old Yiddish saying [;)][:p][:D]
QUOTE: "and if my grandmother had wheels, she'd be a wagon" ...Old Yiddish saying
QUOTE: Originally posted by BRAKIE For all you "artist" out there how much did your last layout sell for? I would like to see correct answers when the question is ask again about selling a layout since 99% of the replies will be a layout as a rule can't be sold.Art? Not hardly.At least you can sell art...Model railroading is not nor has it ever been a art.Sadly that is more crap from the pages of MR that was sallow hook,line and sinker.
QUOTE: Originally posted by andrechapelon Why cannot a chair be a piece of art? Simply because it has a function other than simply to exist? Who said the function of art is simply to exist? I may be way off base here, but I have always thought that art exists because it enhances the human experience. As for the criticism that a Shaker chair is simply a chair, it's like saying El Greco's "Death Of The Count Of Orgaz" is simply pigment on canvas or that Michelangelo's "David" is simply a chunk of carved marble.
QUOTE: The funny thing is, you've got yourself into a logical bind. If a work of art can be functional, then it has a purpose other than simple existence. Is the cathedral at Chartres any less a work of art because it's not only used for worship services, that was its original purpose? Or the Duomo in Florence. Or, for that matter, St. Peter's Basilica in Rome.
QUOTE: The modern "Ars Gratia Artis" (art for art's sake) delusion is just that; a delusion. It may work as MGM's motto, but it obscures the fact that MGM never made movies just for the sake of making movies, they made and still make movies to make money (Ars Gratia Pecuniae - art for the sake of money - would be a truer slogan).
QUOTE: I've been fortunate to have traveled extensively and to have visited the cathedrals mentioned above, not to mention the galleries of the Prado in Madrid, the Uffizi in Florence and the Louvre in Paris. As I recall, every work of art I saw in those galleries was done on commission for some patron. IOW, not one of those works of art was done simply that they might exist. They were done so that the artist could earn his daily bread so that he could go on existing.
QUOTE: And just to make this a bit more on topic, yes, the color scheme on a locomotive can be a work of art. Santa Fe's Warbonnet scheme certainly was.
QUOTE: Originally posted by SpaceMouse Instead of saying what I think is not art, I'll see if I can put what I think is art. Art to me is anything that is something created with an intended audience (that includes oneself) with the purpose of evoking a response whether that be emotional, mental (as in thought provoking) or as in the case model railroading an illusion of realism like a landscape painting. In other words, it stimulates or guides the imagination. A chair can be functional when you sit in it, or it can be art, if it makes you think or feel.
QUOTE: Originally posted by Brunton QUOTE: Originally posted by SpaceMouse Instead of saying what I think is not art, I'll see if I can put what I think is art. Art to me is anything that is something created with an intended audience (that includes oneself) with the purpose of evoking a response whether that be emotional, mental (as in thought provoking) or as in the case model railroading an illusion of realism like a landscape painting. In other words, it stimulates or guides the imagination. A chair can be functional when you sit in it, or it can be art, if it makes you think or feel. OK. I understand something of what you see as art. Hopefully by this time you understand something of what I consider art. Hm. Not quite the same. I'm fine with it if you are. [8D] How 'bout them Steelers?
QUOTE: Originally posted by Brunton QUOTE: Originally posted by andrechapelon Why cannot a chair be a piece of art? Simply because it has a function other than simply to exist? Who said the function of art is simply to exist? I may be way off base here, but I have always thought that art exists because it enhances the human experience. As for the criticism that a Shaker chair is simply a chair, it's like saying El Greco's "Death Of The Count Of Orgaz" is simply pigment on canvas or that Michelangelo's "David" is simply a chunk of carved marble.A chair is something upon which one sits. It may be artfully done or decorated, but it's still a chair. How is saying a chair is just a chair a criticism? If I say that you don't know how to use the word properly, that's a criticism (and not a potshot - please don't take it as such). Saying a chair is a chair, regardless of what kind of chair it is, isn't. Your analogies to art and my statment about the chair are woefully flawed, and completely inapplicable. Those artworks were created as art. A chair is created to place one's**** upon.
QUOTE: Originally posted by SpaceMouse We could dance some more but not much point. Look out Indy!
QUOTE: Originally posted by vsmith this is a chair, designed purely to be looked at, built as a design philosophy statement..in other words as a piece of Art.[:D]