To add comments or start new threads please go to the full version of: What Is The Aesthetic Goal Of Plastic Art?
PhysForum Science, Physics and Technology Discussion Forums > Biology, Chemistry, Medicine, Other Sciences > Other Sciences

coberst
What is the aesthetic goal of plastic art?

Quickies from Wiki:
“Plastic arts are those visual arts that involve the use of materials that can be molded or modulated in some way, often in three dimensions. Examples are clay, paint and plaster.”
Aesthetics is commonly known as the study of sensory values. More broadly, scholars in the field define aesthetics as "critical reflection on art, culture and nature”.

The art historian is led to conclude that primitive humanity was impressed with the theosophical mystical insight view of reality, i.e. that underlying visible nature there must be a superior driving force; they imagined this force must have a human like form since they could not imagine a form any greater than the human form. This human world view moved from infinite polytheism to anthropological polytheism to present day anthropological monotheism.

“Whereas infinite polytheism presupposed a corresponding number of autonomous forces underlying the diverse phenomena of nature reformed polytheism perceived numerous natural phenomena as embodiments of one and the same power. Monotheism brought this refinement process to its culmination by establishing a single force as the original agent of all phenomena.”

How did antique wo/man approach an art form in which they considered that nature revealed “to the human eye only those aspects that are essential, random, and transitory, then art must create for them the essential, the meaningful, and the eternal parts”?

Riegl informs me that “the human hand fashions works from lifeless matter according to the same formal principles as nature does”. All human art production is at its core “nothing other than a contest with nature…The history of art is the history of the creative human being’s victories as he competes with nature.”

The human urge to create visual art is not the desire to imitate nature but it is a desire to compete with and to expose the essential aspects of nature. “Behind every work of art, then, we must presuppose the presence of a work of nature (or several such) with which the work of art is designed to compete.” Art is the means to accomplish the primary aesthetic goal of competing with nature while satisfying the inner urge to comprehend nature.

Art is meant to reveal the “essential, the meaningful, the eternal parts” of nature.
In doing so wo/man judged that “only the perfect is entitled to exist in art”. Since in nature only the strongest prevailed so then in art only the perfect and the strong must prevail.


Quotes from Historical Grammar of the Visual Arts by Alois Riegl


Nihilist
Well like I say in all my posts I’m a non-science community person, however it just so happens I am an artist. So this is right up my ally.

QUOTE
Quotes from Historical Grammar of the Visual Arts by Alois Riegl


The quotes sound more like an argument for creationism than a description of ascetics.

QUOTE (->
QUOTE
Quotes from Historical Grammar of the Visual Arts by Alois Riegl


The quotes sound more like an argument for creationism than a description of ascetics.

All human art production is at its core “nothing other than a contest with nature"


Nonsense, art has no one purpose or function.

QUOTE
Art is the means to accomplish the primary aesthetic goal of competing with nature while satisfying the inner urge to comprehend nature


More, Nonsense. Just because it’s in a book doesn’t make it true.

QUOTE (->
QUOTE
Art is the means to accomplish the primary aesthetic goal of competing with nature while satisfying the inner urge to comprehend nature


More, Nonsense. Just because it’s in a book doesn’t make it true.

What is the aesthetic goal of plastic art?


That’s too broad a question for me to even make sense of what you are trying to ask. Each piece of art (plastic or otherwise) has an ascetic goal but they all don’t share the same one.
Nihilist
Disregard what I wrote before because I realized you didn’t actually want to discuss the topic, you just wanted to answer your own question. I’m not trying to be rude but what’s the point of that?
coberst
QUOTE (Nihilist+Jul 11 2009, 12:44 AM)
Disregard what I wrote before because I realized you didn’t actually want to discuss the topic, you just wanted to answer your own question. I’m not trying to be rude but what’s the point of that?

I am convinced that America and the world are on the abyss of self destruction. The only path to preventing that destruction is for the citizens to become more intellectually sophisticated quickly. My posts are meant to awaken he citizens to our mutual problem.
Nihilist
QUOTE
My posts are meant to awaken he citizens to our mutual problem.


That’s pretty much what I thought you would say.

How many other sites and forums do you post these same topics on?

QUOTE (->
QUOTE
My posts are meant to awaken he citizens to our mutual problem.


That’s pretty much what I thought you would say.

How many other sites and forums do you post these same topics on?

The only path to preventing that destruction is for the citizens to become more intellectually sophisticated quickly


Well I have read all your last weeks post and I would be hard pressed to say they could help anyone. This book in particular, that you discuss in this topic, is a good example.

Fist, art isn’t the breaking point of society that needs to be mended with education (maybe T.V. and Cinema as an art form does, but not “plastic art” as you put it). I don’t think anyone has ever said “If those darn sculptors would only understand ascetics better America would be saved”….well that is other than you seem to be doing in this topic.

Second, the book you posted is garbage. There’s not a single reason anyone should take the author or any of his ideas seriously. The book seems more like an attempted to push a hidden agenda for creationism than it does a book about the ascetics of art and nature, like I said before. Are you sure that you are trying to educate and not trying to convert people on this forum?

Last, why try to educate people on THIS FORUM? If I had to guess I would say more than half the people on this forum have a higher education than you do. Go post this spam on the Jerry Springer forum; I’m sure there is one.
Murdoc
i think its fair.. its actually not a bad read really.
Nihilist
Well I am being a little harsh on the book, because of the person that posted it. I do think its garbage, but I don’t really think it’s an attempt to convert people. If anything it’s just a very open minded book. Meaning it’s got a lot of philosophy and very little facts. As for the poster, all he does is post this spam and leave. He has no intention of having a real discussion about the topic, so it’s frustrating to me as to why he would even post this on a forum (meant for discussion) and not just do a blog.
PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.
To quit out of "lo-fi" mode and return to the regular forums, please click here.