My views on 'What is art?'

To start with, art, though it has a name, specifies nothing, categorises nothing, and is so much of everything, it is nothing. The debate of what is art is  still raging now and although sides to the argument have fallen, more evidence is put forward.

For example, ask a child to do a piece of art work, and what do they draw? A house, a car, not a good one, but a car or house none the less. Then ask a proffesional artist to do a piece of art work and they draw a river, bridge, cottage, sky, sunset, anything at all and so these two things are linked. They can draw what they want, but still, its art.

The more popular pieces of art work such as Whistler's Mother and The Last Supper, are categorised in such a way because of what? Because of how many people want to own them? Because of their artist? Because of the way they were made? No. It's because of their unique qualities, their 'Randomness' as it were, or atleast because of how it's nothing. Nothing important. Just something to stare at. A piece of paper or canvas splashed with paint or colour. No real reason to them but they are here, and we named them art.

If you have views or would like to second my opinion, please comment or message me. Thanks guys x

------------------------------------------

Why mourn a lost loved one, when heaven gained an angel. x

------------------------------------------