Quote From cleverclogs:
You may paint a picture of a castle with acrylics, and if you're really good, perhaps capture something of the life that buzzed in and around it hundreds of years ago.
Or, you could model it in 3d, put archers on the towers, sword-wielding guards at the gates, and peasants with their markets and chickens, perhaps even a well-guarded king in a regal chamber. Then make it all into a video game, and give the user a character who can walk around the place, hear the conversations and sounds, perhaps even provoke the guards and pursue the king, whose extravagant feasts have perhaps rendered not so fleet-of-foot!
I was thinking this as I played 'Assassin's Creed', and figured art today can potentially evoke so much more emotion and thought than traditional arts.
Of course I'm a biologist so probably sound like a blabbering idiot talking in an art thread! What I'm getting at though is that I'd probably come away more thrilled from E3, or the cinema, than Tate. Agree with Eska really! An appreciation for art is perhaps more vigorous today than it has ever been -- when we include cinema and video games, billboards and adverts at bus-stops etc., it seems we're often consuming and enjoying art without realizing it. The BBC for example has those short video sequences in-between programmes; right now there's one of people wearing colourful pants/shoes/stripey leggings and dancing about; they also had those people doing capoeira on a roof which looked way cool -- if this isn't art I don't know what is!
I'm going through a dificult phase, so wont contribute much, except to say thanks to CC for this delightful post. Yes - art is a concept, free to be understood as the creator and beholder pleases, as most concepts. All that you cite is art, and we all interpret, receive, consumer, pass by, ponder over or ignore these things every day in our city lives :-) A lovely post from a biologist, perhaps I found it the most simple and convincing in this thread.
Bug..
