What is Art and Not Art? (Lets Debate)

We know there is a lot of controversy over what is art and what is not considered art. But what is this debate really about? Is it about defining art or determining its value? And does the definition even matter?

In this article, we’ll discuss these questions, provide our opinion, and try to clarify the nature of art. As art is subjective, you won’t get an absolute answer to the question, but I will let you decide.

So, let’s get started!

So, What is Art and Not Art?

Keeping subjectivity in mind, art can be defined as communication, creative expression, aesthetics, and an unmeasurable value for someone. Things that do not fit the characteristics in previous sentences cannot be called art.

To explore further, Art is the process or product of deliberately arranging elements to appeal to the senses or emotions. It encompasses various human activities, creations, and forms of expression, including music, literature, film, photography, sculpture, and painting.

The purpose of art may be to provoke a reaction, document reality, stimulate the imagination, explore the nature of perception, or express an idea. The meaning of art is often deeply personal and can be challenging to define.

Ultimately, what each person considers art is subjective and can vary widely. Some people view art as a form of self-expression, while others see it as a way of communicating ideas or emotions. It may be seen as a way of exploring the world around us or as a form of entertainment.

What is Not Considered Art?

Anything not created with the sole objective of being art is not considered art. This includes, but is not limited to, things like:

• Functional objects (e.g., furniture, utensils)
• Natural objects (e.g., rocks, leaves)
• Photographs (unless they are part of an artistic project)
• Commercial products (e.g., advertisements, packaging)

Non-art is often created for a different purpose than art. For example, a chair is designed to be functional, while a painting is meant to be aesthetic. A photograph may capture a moment or tell a story, but it is not created with the same intent as a work of art.

This is not to say that non-art can’t be beautiful or exciting, but it is not created with the same purpose as art. When approaching art, it is important to keep this in mind so that you can appreciate it for what it is, a unique expression of the human experience.

What Separates Art from Not-Art?

Artist’s intention is the primary motive that separates Art from Not-Art. It could be a painting on a canvas, a sculpture made of bronze, or even a song written on paper. 

If the artist didn’t intend it to be an artwork, it’s not art like doodles or scribbles. They’re not considered artworks unless the artist specifically intended them to be art.

The same goes for any object modified or changed in some way. For example, a rock that’s been painted is still a rock.

This looks like a silly distinction, but it’s essential to make. It’s the difference between a work of art and a simple object.

What Are the Characteristics That Differentiate Art from Non-Art?

There are several key characteristics that are often cited to differentiate art from non-art:

1. Aesthetic properties: Artworks have aesthetic qualities and properties that evoke sensory or emotional responses and things like beauty, ugliness, sublimity, etc. Non-art objects typically don’t display these aesthetic properties or don’t intend to.
2. Representational properties: Most artworks represent some real or imaginary aspect of the world, even in an abstract form. They refer to things beyond themselves. Non-art objects usually don’t have this representational quality.
3. Formal design qualities: Artworks demonstrate conscious design decisions by the artist about composition, color, line, shapes, textures, space, etc. Everyday non-art objects don’t display formal design qualities.
4. Communication: Art conveys ideas, meanings, and emotions from the artist to the viewer through symbolic language. Non-art objects don’t intend to communicate in this way.
5. Originality: Artworks have an element of novel creation, not just replication. This separates them from non-art mass-produced objects.
6. Expression: Art allows artists to express their inner vision and emotions through the work. Non-art has no such expressive quality.
7. Institutions: Art is often defined through its presentation in certain establishments like museums, galleries, etc., which certify it as art. Everyday objects are usually not part of this system.

The key is that art has certain formal, aesthetic, expressive, communicative, and institutional features that give it a special status compared to ordinary non-art objects and artifacts. However, disagreements exist about which qualities are necessary and sufficient for defining art.

Who Decides What is Art?

The intriguing question of who decides what is considered art has been debated for years. It’s not as simple as just pointing at a painting or a sculpture and declaring it art.

There’s a whole world behind the scenes, made up of artists, art critics, curators, and the viewing public, who all have a say.

Artists create, critics analyze, curators display, and viewers react – this vibrant interaction ultimately shapes our understanding of what is and isn’t art. It’s like a giant conversation where everyone gets to pitch in.

So, in the end, it can be argued that we all have a role in deciding what is considered art.

What Are Some Prominent Examples Where the Line Between Art and Non-Art Was Debated?

Here are some notable examples of works and cases that sparked debate about the line between art and non-art:

1. Duchamp’s Readymades: Marcel Duchamp’s exhibiting manufactured objects like a urinal as art in the 1910s outraged many. Questioning if they constitute legitimate art. Still sparks debate on what can be art.
2. Brillo Boxes by Warhol: In 1964, Andy Warhol exhibited wood replicas of Brillo Boxes as art, puzzling onlookers regarding the differences between his sculptures of the boxes and the commercial ones in shops.
3. Yves Klein – The Artist exhibited supposedly empty gallery spaces as artworks themselves in the 1950s. Made people dispute if an artwork needs tangible, physical embodiment.
4. Mark Rothko’s Color Field Paintings – Criticism on whether Rothko’s works with blocks of color are profound spiritual, artistic expressions or just empty, meaningless forms.
5. Is Graffiti/Street Art legitimate art? – Debate continues as while the works have aesthetic qualities, some don’t consider it bonafide art since it isn’t formally institutionalized.
6. Outsider Art – Art created by those without formal training brings disputes on whether conventional ideas of artistic sophistication matter for something to qualify as art.
7. Varieties of conceptual and performance artworks – From slicing objects to staging interventions – extreme displays staged by artists spark continual disagreements on the boundaries of art, often outraging those beyond the art world.

The very definition, classifications and borders of art remain points of profound contention and artworks challenging deep-set ideas of art tend to attract searing debates on issues of artistic merit, creativity and meaning. The disputes reveal the complex questions underpinning fundamental conceptions of art.

What are the Characteristics of an Artwork?

Artwork is usually the result of a deliberate decision by the artist. It is a physical object or digital image created for a specific purpose, such as to be displayed in a gallery or sold.

The materials used to create an artwork can vary widely and may include painting, drawing, sculpting, photography, digital art, and more.

Let us understand artistic characteristics to decide if a piece is art.

1. Aesthetic quality and visual appeal: An artwork demonstrates competent composition, balance of elements, artistic technique, and consideration of color, shape, texture, form, etc., to craft a visually compelling piece, even if seemingly simple or abstract.
2. Conceptual meaning: Great artworks express thoughtful ideas or symbolic themes that engage the viewer intellectually and emotionally, communicating a distinct perspective or truth.
3. Evidence of imagination/creativity: The artwork exhibits novel visions and creative problem-solving rather than formulaic or derivative approaches. This sparks intellectual intrigue.
4. Authenticity and originality: The artwork has a quality of “personal signature,” expressing its creator’s unique vision and inner world. It brings something new rather than imitating other works.
5. Emotive expression: Viewers connect empathetically, sensing the feelings and experiences conveyed through the art or by provoking/challenging emotion.
6. Craftsmanship: The artwork displays mastery of artistic materials and adept expertise in handling the media chosen to execute the creative vision.
7. Consideration of audience: Details attract sustained attention and engagement of viewers/participants, indicating care for public reception and interaction with the work.
8. Contextual awareness: Even abstract works reference some social, cultural, political, or art historical traditions and contexts, which layer deeper meaning when recognized.

Is Everything Art?

No, not everything is art. But anything can be art if the artist intends it to be. It’s up to the artist to decide what is and isn’t art. It isn’t easy to wrap your head around, but it’s important to remember that art is subjective.

What one person considers art, another may not. It’s all a matter of perspective. We can all experience the same piece of art, but we may each see something different. This is what makes art so interesting.

What is Art for Art’s Sake?

The French philosopher Victor Cousin popularized the phrase “art for art’s sake” in the 19th century and often used it to describe works created solely for beauty’s sake, without any practical purpose. 

This type of art dates back to the Romantic Era, when artists began to see themselves as independent creators who were not bound by the rules of society. 

Today, there are still some artists who create purely for the sake of beauty. For these artists, art was a form of self-expression not meant to be understood or interpreted by others. Instead, it was meant to be enjoyed for its own sake. 

However, many believe all art should have a purpose beyond simply being aesthetically pleasing. They argue that art should be used to express important ideas or to tell a story.

Why is Modern Art, not Art for Some?

For traditionalists, recognizable skill, beauty and noble purpose defined art. But modern artists valued creative originality and emotional evocation over technical polish or purely visual appeal.
Avant-garde movements like abstract expressionism, minimalism, conceptual art, and found object art were provoked by rebelling against institutionalized standards, frustrating viewers who wanted skill, attractiveness, and clear meaning.
As contemporary art morphs in radical directions, traditional benchmarks for judging art increasingly fail, although criticism that postmodern creations lose deeper meaning and cultural continuity retains influence across generations schooled in classical notions of fine art.

For these reasons, many believe modern art is not art at all. It is simply a way for artists to get attention or make a statement without creating something meaningful or beautiful.

Should Money be a Factor in Defining Art?

Money has always been a factor in art. Throughout history, finances have been intertwined with art, whether commissioning a portrait or buying a painting.

There are a lot of thoughts on this issue. One important principle is that art should be available to all, regardless of socio-economic status. Another principle is that while money should not define art, it can play a role in determining its value.

Ultimately, I think it comes down to what you consider art. If you believe that only certain things qualify as art, then money can be a factor in determining their value. However, if you think anything can be art, money shouldn’t matter. It’s all about perception.

Is AI Art an Art?

The hot topic in 2023 is AI Art, which is evolving quickly, adding one more variable to the debate: Is AI Art an Art? AI or artificial intelligence is programming computers to do things that typically require human intelligence.

As new technologies emerge, artists find new ways to create and share their work. With the rise of artificial intelligence (AI), we are starting to see machines create artwork. And some people argue that this can be considered art.

AI-created artwork can be considered art only if it meets specific criteria. First, the artwork must be creative and imaginative. Second, it must have some aesthetic value. And third, it must be original. It can be considered art if it meets all of these requirements.

However, some people disagree with this idea. They argue that AI-created artwork is not art because humans do not make it. But I believe that this distinction is irrelevant. Artwork’s value lies in creativity and skill, not the artist’s humanity.

As technology advances and fresh art forms surface, the discussion on what should be classified as art will persist.

Conclusion

What is art and what is not art? This is a difficult question to answer, as there are many gray areas. However, we can say that an artwork typically has specific characteristics; it must be aesthetically pleasing, original, and expressive.

Some things are generally considered not to be art- such as objects that have a function other than decorative. What separates art from non-art is somewhat subjective but often depends on the artist’s intent and how viewers receive the work.

Some people believe everything is art, even if it doesn’t have aesthetic value. Some belief, including financial considerations, is necessary when defining what qualifies as art.

Foreseeing how art will evolve is challenging, but it will probably continue to manifest in various forms.

Thanks for reading.

Frequently Asked Questions