1344
submitted 1 year ago by seitanic to c/funny@sh.itjust.works
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] Gabu@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago

It's art as long as the one who draws them has a message to deliver (besides "hehe, I'm drawing cocks on a wall")

[-] reverendsteveii@lemm.ee 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

what makes "hehe I'm drawing cocks on the wall" invalid? let's examine a situation where the person who painted the cocks didn't know that there used to be traditional art there, but I do. I see the cocks, think about what used to be there before someone "fixed" it, and I receive a message even if none was intended. Is it art in that case? If it is, did the person who just wanted to doodle some dongs create it, or did I?

[-] Gabu@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

The clueless case is invalid because it's strictly a descriptive/self-apparent exercise – lest every single act become art, thus depriving art of meaning. I don't have an authoritative answer to your second question, but I'd argue you've created an ephemeral, individual piece of art.

[-] thonofpy@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Exactly. The message here is more along the lines of "pity this was painted over so boringly, this is what you get". It is not just a wall, it is the wall with the original artwork still underneath a thin layer of paint. I call art. Even with just the "hehe", I'd say it still has the old meaning of any mark made on purpose anywhere: "I was here." (That seems to be the main point of tagging.)

this post was submitted on 20 Sep 2023
1344 points (98.1% liked)

Funny

7012 readers
325 users here now

General rules:

Exceptions may be made at the discretion of the mods.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS