Poll: Art or Life? What's more beautiful?

[Blunderboy]

Life.
What are all the great pieces of art striving to replicate and convey? Life.
None of them however can actually match the beauty and frailty of life itself though. Even the finest master pieces will fall short, especially in the eyes of the artist themselves.

 

[Madara XIII]

Helloooooooooooooooooooo Escapists.....and lacktheknack hehehe

O__O Care to explain?

Life, because I'm technically minded and real life just fits together waaaaay too well for me to not be awed by it.

Hehehe I see my "Alienate certain Escapist Members" method is still working. I did the same thing with my buddy Palademon on the Preferred types of minions thread awhile back. I just do that for some fun and games.

Seen Here:
http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.290215-Poll-Your-preferred-form-of-Minion-Army-or-Legion?page=1

 

[Madara XIII]

Both are disgusting and beautiful in equal parts. No matter how awesome life can be, there will always be slugs, dung beetles and, most importantly, manta rays. And no matter how many Portals you make, we will always have our fair share of Twilights, *BLANK* Movies and Human Centipedes.

Life.

Because without all of this life around us, we wouldn't have any art.

Here's how I think of it: If I were in a burning building, and I had the choice to save either the most beautiful piece of art in the world (it's subjective, but bear with me here damn it) or some person that I didn't even know, I think saving that person would be the right thing to do. I'd go so far as to say that anyone who saves the art is a selfish bastard.

Think about that for a minute. By saying art is more beautiful than life, are you saying that the art is more valuable?

What would you do if the person was replaced with an ant?

Fucking pessimism.

I assumed the OP was talking about humans. But now that I think about it an ant is a life and therefore quite valuable, and were I to see it I would try to save it instead of the art.

However, in this situation I would most likely not be able to see nor hear the ant's cries for help.

Loopholes FTW!

DAMN YOUR LOOPHOLES!!! Honestly it's like every escapist has the ability of a Lawyer from the deepest bowels of hell. Is there no loophole you all can't find!?!?

 

[Madara XIII]

Both are disgusting and beautiful in equal parts. No matter how awesome life can be, there will always be slugs, dung beetles and, most importantly, manta rays. And no matter how many Portals you make, we will always have our fair share of Twilights, *BLANK* Movies and Human Centipedes.

Damn good point. Hehehe I love how you bring video games into this discussion as well to only validate them as an art. Good Job.

Personally I kinda agree. We may have Echochrome, Shadow of the Colossues, and Limbo, but we also have Duke Nukem, Postal (Fun as hell btw) and Just Cause 2, which I argue is an art because not since Saints Row 2 have I had so much fun in a freaking sandbox game.

 

[Madara XIII]

Both are disgusting and beautiful in equal parts. No matter how awesome life can be, there will always be slugs, dung beetles and, most importantly, manta rays. And no matter how many Portals you make, we will always have our fair share of Twilights, *BLANK* Movies and Human Centipedes.

Damn good point. Hehehe I love how you bring video games into this discussion as well to only validate them as an art. Good Job.

Personally I kinda agree. We may have Echochrome, Shadow of the Colossues, and Limbo, but we also have Duke Nukem, Postal (Fun as hell btw) and Just Cause 2, which I argue is an art because not since Saints Row 2 have I had so much fun in a freaking sandbox game.

Honestly? I didn't even think about it. I just said one piece of art that I thought was great, and 3 that I thought were terrible. It was only after typing it out that I noticed the 'good' one was a game and the 'bad' ones were all movies.

Dara O'Briain does an excellent piece on this, while we're on this tangent:


And Manta Rays are hideous. And EVERYWHERE. Don't ignore them, or they'll finally team up with the moths, learn to fly, and take over the world.

You have been warned.

OMFG XD That dude is hilarious. I especially loved the Metal Gear Solid bit. Thanks for introducing me to a new comedian.

Secondly I think Manta Rays are cuddly. Like Ocean Puppies. They jump up on the side of the tank and flap their cute giant fins with their mouths wide open at you going *SCHLAP SCHLAP SCHLAP* Beggin you to feed them.

So god damn cute. Manta Rays aren't dangerous what so ever

 

[Dalek Caan]

Since I never really got into art I would say Life.

 

[Sven und EIN HUND]

-

 

[Madara XIII]

Both are disgusting and beautiful in equal parts. No matter how awesome life can be, there will always be slugs, dung beetles and, most importantly, manta rays. And no matter how many Portals you make, we will always have our fair share of Twilights, *BLANK* Movies and Human Centipedes.

Damn good point. Hehehe I love how you bring video games into this discussion as well to only validate them as an art. Good Job.

Personally I kinda agree. We may have Echochrome, Shadow of the Colossues, and Limbo, but we also have Duke Nukem, Postal (Fun as hell btw) and Just Cause 2, which I argue is an art because not since Saints Row 2 have I had so much fun in a freaking sandbox game.

Honestly? I didn't even think about it. I just said one piece of art that I thought was great, and 3 that I thought were terrible. It was only after typing it out that I noticed the 'good' one was a game and the 'bad' ones were all movies.

Dara O'Briain does an excellent piece on this, while we're on this tangent:


And Manta Rays are hideous. And EVERYWHERE. Don't ignore them, or they'll finally team up with the moths, learn to fly, and take over the world.

You have been warned.

OMFG XD That dude is hilarious. I especially loved the Metal Gear Solid bit. Thanks for introducing me to a new comedian.

Secondly I think Manta Rays are cuddly. Like Ocean Puppies. They jump up on the side of the tank and flap their cute giant fins with their mouths wide open at you going *SCHLAP SCHLAP SCHLAP* Beggin you to feed them.

So god damn cute. Manta Rays aren't dangerous what so ever

People like you are the reason I lost faith in humanity years ago. When the Manta Ray uprising comes, you won't be prepared. You'll be sitting in you house one day when suddenly BAM! A Ray comes in through the window and smothers you to death.

I feel like I'm the only one who's even thinking about getting ready for this inevitable war...

Still grief stricken by Steve Irwin's death I see. C'mon though, they're not that bad. They're just creatures that may panic in an unknown situation. What's the worst that can ha

*Manta Ray Busts through the window and starts flopping on me*

AAAAAAAAAGH Call the police! HEEEEELP!!! It's molesting and killing me at the same time!! HELP!

 

[Kryzantine]

I would think that life is more beautiful.

I feel that this whole argument is less... sensory than it should be. Art is, almost by definition, focusing on a portion of our senses. You have painting, an art form that focuses on visual aesthetic; music, which focuses on our hearing; sculpture, which takes both the visual and the touch senses into account. The final product is intended to take those specific senses and heighten them to a point that is nearly impossible to reach in our actual lives. Humourously, you could conceivably argue that art is really just a bunch of drugs.

Of course, anything that hits all 5 of those stages isn't really art anymore, it becomes a part of life.

Spoiler

This is art. (Heh, I feel like I'm quoting Portal 2.) It is a photograph of an avenue I live near in Brooklyn, Emmons Ave, at night. It's an alright photograph, too, nothing too fancy, but it conveys its message well.

But does looking at a screenshot of Emmons Ave at night do Emmons Ave justice? I sometimes go out at night to Emmons just because I feel like it. I don't bring my camera either, because I know that absolutely no photograph will suffice to capture what makes Emmons Ave, Emmons Ave. You can't take a picture, or draw a painting, to express the smell, for instance, or the variety of people to meet. You can't simulate the feeling of neon lights from seafood restaurants meeting the pitch blackness of the marina. You can exaggerate it, maybe, but you still can't put the feeling in the person. Maybe a piece of literature could, but I doubt it. No matter what, you can't have the breeze on your shoulders to provide you with its beauty.

So I'd have to say life. By definition, it's a better experience of beauty, that extends far beyond aesthetics.

 

[the rye]

Art is by it's very nature beauty, that is it has the unique aesthetic quality.

However is life more beautiful? Now there can be episodic instances where in we feel "beauty" for example gazing at a natural landscape. But this does not entail life, in fact these are just events and while we could label these as 'beautiful', we cannot call life beautiful by your definition as it itself holds no beauty.

Now in reference to mythology I think you confuse beauty with lust. In fact you sight the Greek gods nature to have sexual relationships with humans, but this does not indicate that it was because humans were beautiful at best the beauty the Greek gods desired was a shallow sexual beauty. Furthermore by arguing that the Greek gods desire to fornicate with humans is somehow a valid account of beauty devalues it. We are not interested in beauty in forms of attractiveness or sexuality.

Furthermore we must make a distinction in beauty, the beauty of a man and the beauty of the novel "The great Gatsby" would have very distinct definitions.

 

[Madara XIII]

Both are disgusting and beautiful in equal parts. No matter how awesome life can be, there will always be slugs, dung beetles and, most importantly, manta rays. And no matter how many Portals you make, we will always have our fair share of Twilights, *BLANK* Movies and Human Centipedes.

Damn good point. Hehehe I love how you bring video games into this discussion as well to only validate them as an art. Good Job.

Personally I kinda agree. We may have Echochrome, Shadow of the Colossues, and Limbo, but we also have Duke Nukem, Postal (Fun as hell btw) and Just Cause 2, which I argue is an art because not since Saints Row 2 have I had so much fun in a freaking sandbox game.

Honestly? I didn't even think about it. I just said one piece of art that I thought was great, and 3 that I thought were terrible. It was only after typing it out that I noticed the 'good' one was a game and the 'bad' ones were all movies.

Dara O'Briain does an excellent piece on this, while we're on this tangent:


And Manta Rays are hideous. And EVERYWHERE. Don't ignore them, or they'll finally team up with the moths, learn to fly, and take over the world.

You have been warned.

OMFG XD That dude is hilarious. I especially loved the Metal Gear Solid bit. Thanks for introducing me to a new comedian.

Secondly I think Manta Rays are cuddly. Like Ocean Puppies. They jump up on the side of the tank and flap their cute giant fins with their mouths wide open at you going *SCHLAP SCHLAP SCHLAP* Beggin you to feed them.

So god damn cute. Manta Rays aren't dangerous what so ever

People like you are the reason I lost faith in humanity years ago. When the Manta Ray uprising comes, you won't be prepared. You'll be sitting in you house one day when suddenly BAM! A Ray comes in through the window and smothers you to death.

I feel like I'm the only one who's even thinking about getting ready for this inevitable war...

Still grief stricken by Steve Irwin's death I see. C'mon though, they're not that bad. They're just creatures that may panic in an unknown situation. What's the worst that can ha

*Manta Ray Busts through the window and starts flopping on me*

AAAAAAAAAGH Call the police! HEEEEELP!!! It's molesting and killing me at the same time!! HELP!

IT'S COMING! NO ONE WANTED TO BELIEVE! BELIEVE THEY EVEN EXISTED! BUT WHEN THE TRUTH FINALLY DAWNS, IT DAWNS IN MANTA!

*runs to underground manta-proof bunker that took me 3 years to build*

LOL where'd you get that quote? Was that from a movie, game or book or did you make that up?

 

[Lilani]

-snip-

Art could not exist without life, and what would life be without art?

I think art can certainly enhance parts of life that would otherwise go unseen, but I also think there are some things you can only experience in life. Art may be able to show you the vibrant colors on a beetle's back, but even the most sensual, romantic, or erotic works of art cannot replace that feeling of truly being one with someone else. That is something best experienced in life. Artists may try to capture this, but they do not do it to replace or replicate that feeling. They only do it to record the feeling, and show how it felt for them. Like a visual diary, or sorts. Or maybe even a fantasy? Either way, art cannot replace life, but life would be a lot more dull without art.

 

[the rye]

I would think that life is more beautiful.

I feel that this whole argument is less... sensory than it should be. Art is, almost by definition, focusing on a portion of our senses. You have painting, an art form that focuses on visual aesthetic; music, which focuses on our hearing; sculpture, which takes both the visual and the touch senses into account. The final product is intended to take those specific senses and heighten them to a point that is nearly impossible to reach in our actual lives. Humourously, you could conceivably argue that art is really just a bunch of drugs.

Of course, anything that hits all 5 of those stages isn't really art anymore, it becomes a part of life.

This is art. (Heh, I feel like I'm quoting Portal 2.) It is a photograph of an avenue I live near in Brooklyn, Emmons Ave, at night. It's an alright photograph, too, nothing too fancy, but it conveys its message well.

But does looking at a screenshot of Emmons Ave at night do Emmons Ave justice? I sometimes go out at night to Emmons just because I feel like it. I don't bring my camera either, because I know that absolutely no photograph will suffice to capture what makes Emmons Ave, Emmons Ave. You can't take a picture, or draw a painting, to express the smell, for instance, or the variety of people to meet. You can't simulate the feeling of neon lights from seafood restaurants meeting the pitch blackness of the marina. You can exaggerate it, maybe, but you still can't put the feeling in the person. Maybe a piece of literature could, but I doubt it. No matter what, you can't have the breeze on your shoulders to provide you with its beauty.

So I'd have to say life. By definition, it's a better experience of beauty, that extends far beyond aesthetics.

However art is not about a frivolous sensory experience, if so aesthetics would not include accounts of cognitive truths and Huxley's Brave New World would not seem like such a horrid dystopia. By your definition, art is nothing more than a sensory experience, and it is only a hedonistic desire to satisfy one's sensors.But art can convey certain truths, all quiet on the western front may not achieve a sensory experience of WW1 as well as a museum or historical documentary. But it is through the writers skill that he does more then give us a 'sense' experiance of WW1, he evokes pathos and helps us understand the protagonists hardship. Eating seafood and taking night walks though delightful to the senses lacks the unique quality art has to envoke an emotion experience to convey some meaningful purpose or truth.

 

[Kryzantine]

However art is not about a frivolous sensory experience, if so aesthetics would not include accounts of cognitive truths and Huxley's Brave New World would not seem like such a horrid dystopia. By your definition, art is nothing more than a sensory experience, and it is only a hedonistic desire to satisfy one's sensors.But art can convey certain truths, all quiet on the western front may not achieve a sensory experience of WW1 as well as a museum or historical documentary. But it is through the writers skill that he does more then give us a 'sense' experiance of WW1, he evokes pathos and helps us understand the protagonists hardship. Eating seafood and taking night walks though delightful to the senses lacks the unique quality art has to envoke an emotion experience to convey some meaningful purpose or truth.

And you would argue that life does not convey truth everywhere it lies? I thought that was a given. To take the same example, a representation of Emmons Ave might talk about its seediness - posh night clubs mixed with some of the low life that naturally comes with a marina. But being there gives you that truth and then some.

Art, in this case, serves to take away some of the surroundings to focus on a particular aspect one may not consciously note while actually experiencing it; but I feel that everything within a surrounding is important. Even if I don't consciously note this seedy nature, its presence is still there and still affecting me. It is still a part of life.

 

[Shock and Awe]

The world is not beautiful, therefore it is.

It means that while the world may not be perfect, the bad parts just make the good parts just that much more beautiful. You cannot have beauty without something to counterbalance it, otherwise it is pointless. The same applies to all things, such as happiness and life, neither are worth much without sadness and death respectively.

 

[Ham_authority95]

I would definitely say life, but what would art be without life? Or life without art?

 

[Ashcrexl]

I'm actually constantly using art to distract myself from life, so the answer for me is pretty obvious.

 

[PissOffRoth]

-snip-

The general agreement that I'm seeing is that the two need each other. Obviously art needs life or it wouldn't exist. Rocks can't paint. But would life exist without art? I'm not so sure. I think that Mordin Solus from Mass Effect 2 says it best about the Collectors: He is talking about how their race has stagnated and that there are absolutely no remains of the Prothean culture that they were once a part of. He uses the example of how you won't see any art in the halls of a Collector ship as proof of his point. The Collectors only serve as a race of puppets. Is that really living? Sure they're alive, but...

I don't think it is. So it seems evident that art and life are interdependent and build upon each other. They each aspire to be the other. That relationship alone is quite beautiful.

(For the record, Mordin's statement is, in my opinion, one of the most overlooked arguments in favour of games as art).

 

[Versuvius]

Life. Because no piece of art, architecture or machine can come close to performing the miracle of functioning. Every second a balance of chemical reactions and various responses Must happen, else you will very rapidly find yourself being dead. Not only is life beating the odds by surviving 80 odd years by for the most part not fucking this up, the fact it became out of a soup of caustic chemicals and a truly hostile, toxic landscape to create art is astounding. So. How can art be more beautiful than life when life is doing the creating of art? Jack Daniels brings you a philosophistic orangutan in a floral shirt.

 

[Faux Furry]

There is no one answer to that question that isn't dependent upon context. It all depends on the specific work of art or the life of the individual being examined.

One of Frank Frazetta's fantastical master works is far more beautiful than the reality of a life of squalor but the average,everyday life of anyone from a First World Nation is a fair sight less unsightly than the works of Rob Liefeld that even he isn't proud of.