The highest art form: what is it?

[Rome]

Originally Posted by LabelKing

Art is only an illusion of beauty.

I would say that its beauty the illusion and high art the allusion.

I consider religion for religions sake the highest form of art, like grasping at the transcendental in the most childlike way. Only the simplest things can I say are high art, anything else is a manner of complication of the human nature. Like saying mostly nothings in the trappings of eloquence. Love is not art, it’s an amalgamation of chemicals in the brain which studies show generally act the same way and dissipate after about a year.

Where did you find that picture btw? I ran a query for dentistry + androgyny + S&M and came up with something quite different.

 

[matadorpoeta]

Originally Posted by Britalian

Good points. I'm with you on the musician/composer split. Wasn't it Brando who referred to his profession as a craft while others insist it's an art. (Or maybe it was v.v....?)
brando once said that he became an actor becuase it's the easiest thing to do, if you don't know what you want to do.

 

[matadorpoeta]

Originally Posted by Tokyo Slim

I agree that it CAN encompass all the various forms of high art, but that also, it can be purile and lowbrow as well. Thats what I like about it.

That being said, why try and elevate one art form above the rest? There are some instances where, when communicating a certain image, emotion, or narrative, when film falls short of standalone still photography, poetry, music, or literature.

exactly, cinema can be anything. it can be a blank screen with music blaring from the speakers. it can be complete silence with a poem scrolling on the screen. it can be amazing architecture that doesn't exist in reality. it can be a standalone still photograph. and it can do all of these things one after another, at the whim of the director, in a dark theater, with the full attention of its audience.

 

[LabelKing]

Originally Posted by Rome

I would say that its beauty the illusion and high art the allusion.

I consider religion for religions sake the highest form of art, like grasping at the transcendental in the most childlike way. Only the simplest things can I say are high art, anything else is a manner of complication of the human nature. Like saying mostly nothings in the trappings of eloquence. Love is not art, it's an amalgamation of chemicals in the brain which studies show generally act the same way and dissipate after about a year.

Where did you find that picture btw? I ran a query for dentistry + androgyny + S&M and came up with something quite different.
Religion is another point of venture into the transcendental; Kant's definition was that beauty was ultimately objective--and yet subjective at the same time.

He defined the sublime as the musings of an finite being into the infinite(humanity).

As for that picture, it was a Gucci spread by Terry Richardson.

 

[LabelKing]

Originally Posted by matadorpoeta

brando once said that he became an actor becuase it's the easiest thing to do, if you don't know what you want to do.
Klaus Kinski said acting was like being a whore.

 

[Rome]

Originally Posted by LabelKing

Religion is another point of venture into the transcendental; Kant's definition was that beauty was ultimately objective--and yet subjective at the same time.

He defined the sublime as the musings of an finite being into the infinite(humanity).

As for that picture, it was a Gucci spread by Terry Richardson.

Stripped of all its hyperbole, mysticism, and otherwise affections, religion, hints at something much more innate. I much prefer it that art can't be helped.

He (Terry) threads the line between photographer and debaucherous pornographer quite well. I wanted a copy of his book for my coffee table but at its price point was unattainable. The idea of the Polaroids a dirty old man keeps in a shoebox under his bed being treated as art... made me laugh to say the least.

 

[designprofessor]

Being a pianter, I'm for the enduring power of the image.

I don't really have a hierarchy, but seek the transportive qualities of all art forms.

 

[Britalian]

Originally Posted by Rome

its price point was unattainable. .

it was too expensive, right?

 

[Britalian]

Would anyone highly consider advertising?

 

[designprofessor]

Originally Posted by Britalian

Would anyone highly consider advertising?

Yes.
Bernbach, Rand, Ogilvy etc.

Some of the pivotal ad campaigns can compete as being some of the truly memorable images in Western culture.

In my opinion, advertising's brevity seems to exclude a certain level of depth / complexity. Being a "quick read" has its aesthetic drawbacks...and virtues.

 

[Rome]

Originally Posted by Britalian

it was too expensive, right?
$400 is the price I want say.

Adverts in the subliminal sense had thier own artistic value when it was allowed. Filling the theater with a smell of buttered popcorn in the middle of a show is a stroke of genius.

 

[redcaimen]

Kant said, "Mime is the art form that speaks to my soul and yet I am having trouble hearing what its saying." One of his pupils spoke out and said, "hes not saying a damn thing", and was immediately removed from the great mans presence.

 

[Brian SD]

The idea of one art form being the highest is kind of ridiculous.

 

[Rome]

Originally Posted by Brian SD

The idea of one art form being the highest is kind of ridiculous.
At face value yes, it's basically saying one color is better than another with no regard to subjectivity. But there's a good conversation in the undercurrent. It reminds me of the conversation Bruce Lee has with his young pupil in Enter the Dragon, art is basically the finger pointing at the moon, were still missing "all that heavenly glory".

 

[Lamo]

i also adhere to the platonic theory on art