a poem (warning, this piece has a lot of adult language)

Ieatworms, you are my new favorite person!

Qi -- your poem brought about emotions, yes, and perhaps Gwen Stefani doesn't (that's an opinion, by the way), but that still doesn't make this art.

Gal -- My 'dictionary' definition of 'art' comes explicitly from Woolfe, Eliot, and Irigaray.

Art is based on tradition.

If art were based on tradition, then art would never change.

Your taking an intellectual stance on an emotional activity. Your implying by that, that only smart people can do art, which most obviously is not true. You think too much brad. Art isn't based on tradition, drawings and paintings are. But tradition isn't what makes it art. Art makes tradition. Artists are saying something about their time, not the other way around. They observe, and interperate current events, not past ones. Weddings are based on tradition, laws are based on tradition, and neither are considered art in any way.

How can we place a value on art if it is not inextricably bound up in tradition?

And, the artist who goes in seek of anything 'new' ends up finding perversities, not new emotions. The artist who has done true searching knows that art never changes -- only the alignment of the (same) material changes.

Yes it can be about one's feelings, but poetry is a metrical composition, which, it seems to me, this 'poem' lacks, it being, some kind of flow (not meaning it has to rhyme!). It may just be my taste in poems, and their association, but this just doesn't ring as poetry to me.

well, lyrical poetry does, yes. But there are no rules for the composition of poetry. This would be free style.

I'm not saying it isn't poetry. It just isn't artistic.

well, neither is modern art, but its still a million dollar a year industry.

What's your point? I said it wasn't art.

well, obviously you have a poor sense as to what art is.

Art is art because someone, somewhere decides to call it art. Its that simple.

well, obviously you have a poor sense as to what art is.

Obviously, it is you who lacks the artistic sensibility (You can see how these kinds of generic statements about taste are totally meaningless; you just put up a front because you didn't have an argument.).

How can we place a value on different pieces of art? By your definition(s), we can't, and this means that all artists to this point were not 'artists' in any sense -- there was no defining characteristics between the man who devoted his life to art and the man who wrote one poem. Both were artists.

A piece of art visibly changes the constellation that is made by tradition. This piece certainly doesn't do that.

Your still thinking too much about it. Art has nothing to do with tradition. If it did, it would never change. We'd still be looking at stick pictures of bison and migratory patterns.

GUYS. If you want to debate the true definition of art, PLEASE take it to the debate and serious discussion board. Thank you.

Now, let's please leave this thread for further comments on Qi's poem, shall we?

I feel stupid for not realizing the point of this poem at the beginning. But I did find that last line amusing anyway. Now your blog makes much more sense lol.