Published February 7, 2010
Hi! So this is a poem I wrote when I was thinking about things like beauty, people, and definitions, and how we know what something is but we cannot define it. I thought about how certain people were considered "beautiful," and how people like definitions because it makes them feel like they've grasped a concept that they cannot understand, but by defining it they feel like they have. Please tell me what you think and give me suggestions. Thanks!
What are people?
What are we after you erase the molecules and matter that make up our existence?
Only to see us in our purest form,
our souls, only these conceptual things that make us.
Are we art?
They encased the painting in flesh
and bones
and splattered blood all over it,
until we cannot tell if it is art.
But then again, what is art?
Is it the little things that we notice,
piecing together to make something bigger?
We put paint on paper
and encase it in a frame
calling it art
because you cannot touch it,
cannot feel it,
because it is in a box
and therefore considered important.
We know what art is,
but we do not understand it.
Is art beauty?
But then again, what is beauty?
We make up definitions for these conceptual models that we ourselves cannot understand
and yet we do not pause for a moment and ask ourselves why,
why we must have a definition for everything,
why we must put something in a box and call it art.
Points:
Time spent:
IP address:
Canary word: Present
Possible AI signals:
Original Text:
Are you sure you want to delete this comment? This cannot be undone.
Mark this comment as a review? Points will be awarded to the poster.
Your comment was posted, but it wasn’t long enough to count as a review. Reviews need about four complete sentences (at least 250 characters). Try writing another review that explains your thoughts in more detail — the author will appreciate it, and you’ll earn points for it.
141,399 Literary Works • 674,387 Reviews
Call this Ars Poetica! Because it is one, and people will think you are more intelligent just because you have classical allusions in your work. It worked for AD Hope. I don't like all the line breaks, I think it makes it more disjointed. Actually, art allusions would be good, you want to talk about things being subjective, it's such a subjective thing, people still have trouble coping with Rothko for God's sake, let alone conceptual or ephemeral art.
"They encased the painting in flesh
and bones
and splattered blood all over it,"
Pollock! Pollock Pollock Pollock! But I think you could elaborate on the painting analogy, research a little the idea of primers and layers, of turpentine and glaze.
Great job! I like how you showed your point of view within the poem. It really makes me wonder about what you said now... keep writing!
Thanks!
Interesting poem!
The philosophical themes are great. I've studied the philosophy of art and beauty and I like the way you question what art is so purely.
I've also been to a lot of art galleries and it is interesting as to what gives a work of art it's value.
Van Gogh's art wasn't worth much until some time after he died and a biography about him popularized his work. Not to mention his death results in a low quantity of his pieces.
Back to your poem though! I really like some of the repetition and the lines,
"They encased the painting in flesh
and bones
and splattered blood all over it,
until we cannot tell if it is art."
I really enjoyed it keep writing you show a lot of potential!