[surgical_fire]

The problem with this discussion is not only that the definition of "art" lacks a consensus. The main issue is that instead of being a descriptive, a lot of people call something "art" as a compliment. Which is utterly silly, by the way.

Because at that point "art" becomes sinply something that is "aesthetically pleasant", and that will change from person to person. "Art" as a compliment is useless.

If we try to use "art" as a descriptive, then we would need to draw a hypothetical Venn diagram, and define things that are art and things that are not, so we could try to categorize videogames, or whatever AI produces. This implies a lot more agreement than there is currently.

[bookofjoe]

'Art completes what nature cannot bring to a finish. The artist gives us knowledge of nature's unrealised ends.' — Aristotle (284-322 BC)

'The true work of art is but a shadow of the divine perfection.' — Michelangelo (1475-1564)

'Art is a mediator of the unspeakable.' — Goethe (1749-1832)

'A work of art is a corner of nature seen through a temperament.' — Emile Zola (1840-1929)

'Art has absolutely no existence as veracity, as truth.' — Marcel Duchamp (1887-1968)

'Art is science made clear.' — Jean Cocteau (1889-1963)

'Art is anything you can get away with.' — Andy Warhol (1928-1987)