Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2015/04/06

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
Subject: [Leica] Is photography art?
From: george.imagist at icloud.com (George Lottermoser)
Date: Mon, 06 Apr 2015 12:03:01 -0500
References: <8D2338D5BD6731F-1A10-25FFC@webmail-va170.sysops.aol.com> <01DA9C0B-D104-4024-B41F-A4E7B60E89DF@icloud.com> <E3A13647-E3D6-4653-B4A5-90D46A819CD4@gmail.com>
 
On Apr 6, 2015, at 11:35 AM, Steve Barbour wrote:

> We came up with the notion, the conclusion that Art is whatever the maker 
> ie the artist,  refers to as Art.
> n?est-ce pas?

This does not serve as a useful definition of Art (or Artist) for me.

Historical, cultural, and aesthetic criteria do exist
to help us define and understand both Art Objects and the Artists who 
produce them.
Just as criteria exist to help us define and understand good science and 
medicine;
and the scientists and M.D.s that practice those crafts.

Regards,
George Lottermoser 

http://www.imagist.com
http://www.imagist.com/blog
http://www.linkedin.com/in/imagist
Replies: Reply from ric at cartersxrd.net (RicCarter) ([Leica] Is photography art?)
 In reply to: Message from george.imagist at icloud.com (George Lottermoser) ([Leica] Is photography art?)
Message from steve.barbour at gmail.com (Steve Barbour) ([Leica] Is photography art?)