Today's in-class discussion

In class, Alex attempted to come up with a solid definition of art as seen through the eyes of Weitz. He laid out that art and aesthetic are two separate, yet typically intersecting parts of the whole and that there is 1. a genre: the physical thing pertaining to the aesthetic and this brings about 2. the personal satisfaction one gets from creating a work of art which is then 3. satisfactory to at least one other person and 4. art requires some sort of medium.

I came up with two problems I had with this definition. First, there is nothing in this definition regarding to time and the like. All things, art included, change over time. There are always new forms of art being added into society, yet the traditional forms of art--painting, sculpture, music, dance--consistently hold a place in our minds as “art.” What makes these forms so eternal? Why is it that these specific things have been seen as art for centuries?

Second, what is meant by “satisfactory”? Perhaps the artist didn’t want anyone to be satisfied by the piece—maybe (s)he wanted to bring up in the viewer confusion or disgust and leave them unsettled after viewing the work. And oftentimes, art pieces are never even discovered or shared until after the artist’s death—so when this is the case, if the artist never had the chance to know someone was satisfied by their work, then was it not art? Or maybe the artist didn’t even intend for anyone else to see the piece. As is the case with much expressionist art, or even outsider art, many works are intended for the creator alone to see the work and they create it not to satisfy themselves or another but to figure out a feeling/dilemma they have or to make tangible an emotion/thought they’re having.

And lastly, although I couldn’t think of one example on my own, I’m sure there is something out there that doesn’t require a medium that could be considered art by at least one person…Can anyone think of such a thing and help prove this point?

To conclude, this definition we attempted to create is still, pardon the pun here, not satisfying enough to me. Will a concrete definition of art ever be satisfying enough for me...I have yet to find out; but hopefully this semester I'll come to hold a better understanding of where I stand in regards to my stance on the topic.