# Like stupid and pompous idiots, who try to define and limit what art is. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [November 5, 2011, 11:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/like-stupid-and-pompous-idiots-who-try-to-define-and-limit-what-art-is/602008 "2011-11-05T23:33:05Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 24
**Author:** ![Knorf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/58956e/32.png) [@Knorf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Knorf)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 12:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/like-stupid-and-pompous-idiots-who-try-to-define-and-limit-what-art-is/602008/461 "2011-11-14T00:52:09Z")
Hey, gang. Sorry I haven’t been participating lately, but I’ve been traveling and haven’t had time for the SDMB. I’ve enjoyed the several pages of discussion since I last posted. This is a subject that will always stir debate. But I still think there is one conclusion from all this that is inescapable: trying to argue that what someone else thinks is art isn’t art, is very stupid and a complete waste of time. Just say you don’t like it and be done with it. Alban Berg’s opera _Lulu_ is absolutely fantastic, by the way. ---
**Author:** ![Derleth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/b9e5f3/32.png) [@Derleth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Derleth)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 1:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/like-stupid-and-pompous-idiots-who-try-to-define-and-limit-what-art-is/602008/462 "2011-11-14T01:22:33Z")
> [@Knorf](#): > > Hey, gang. Sorry I haven’t been participating lately, but I’ve been traveling and haven’t had time for the SDMB. I actually would like to know what you think of my thesis as it applies to some of your posts. To wit: You made many posts above about how, if art is so technically non-challenging, we don’t make the big money by putting our own shit in some cans. My thesis is that art is defined by the artistic community, and if you’re outside the community you don’t stand a fart’s chance in a windstorm of doing anything that is art, or at least anything that is art in your lifetime. ---
**Author:** ![fumster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9c0ed/32.png) [@fumster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fumster)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 1:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/like-stupid-and-pompous-idiots-who-try-to-define-and-limit-what-art-is/602008/463 "2011-11-14T01:48:33Z")
> [@Knorf](#): > > But I still think there is one conclusion from all this that is inescapable: trying to argue that what someone else thinks is art isn’t art, is very stupid and a complete waste of time. Just say you don’t like it and be done with it. But it’s OK to argue that what someone else thinks _isn’t_ art really is? ---
**Author:** ![tdn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/94ad74/32.png) [@tdn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tdn)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 2:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/like-stupid-and-pompous-idiots-who-try-to-define-and-limit-what-art-is/602008/464 "2011-11-14T14:11:27Z")
> [@Ravenman](#): > > I hadn’t heard of 4’33" before, so I googled it. The first hit was [this.](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hUJagb7hL0E) > > I watched it and _really_ enjoyed it. I actually unmuted my computer to listen to that. Why did I do that? ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/like-stupid-and-pompous-idiots-who-try-to-define-and-limit-what-art-is/602008/465 "2011-11-14T14:40:39Z")
> [@sh1bu1](#): > > But it’s OK to argue that what someone else thinks _isn’t_ art really is? Yes - it’s not a symmetric argument. ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/like-stupid-and-pompous-idiots-who-try-to-define-and-limit-what-art-is/602008/466 "2011-11-14T15:24:01Z")
> [@BigT](#): > > Uh, THAT’S THE ENTIRE POINT! The point of an objective definition is to exclude some pieces. If people didn’t have a problem with what some people called art, they wouldn’t try to come up with an objective definition. Certainly, Polecat appears to believe there is a definition of “art” that includes all worthwhile artists and excludes all worthless ones. I am asserting that there is no such objective definition, and challenging him to prove it by formulating one that doesn’t exclude a recognized past master. ---
**Author:** ![tdn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/94ad74/32.png) [@tdn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tdn)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 3:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/like-stupid-and-pompous-idiots-who-try-to-define-and-limit-what-art-is/602008/467 "2011-11-14T15:27:59Z")
I’m still trying to figure out why people are so hung up on categorizing things as art or not-art. Is it really so important to label everything? ---
**Author:** ![fumster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/e9c0ed/32.png) [@fumster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/fumster)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/like-stupid-and-pompous-idiots-who-try-to-define-and-limit-what-art-is/602008/468 "2011-11-14T16:07:38Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > Yes - it’s not a symmetric argument. yes it is. ---
**Author:** ![Knorf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/58956e/32.png) [@Knorf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Knorf)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 4:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/like-stupid-and-pompous-idiots-who-try-to-define-and-limit-what-art-is/602008/469 "2011-11-14T16:09:58Z")
> [@Derleth](#): > > My thesis is that art is defined by the artistic community, and if you’re outside the community you don’t stand a fart’s chance in a windstorm of doing anything that is art, or at least anything that is art in your lifetime. Ah, yes, the ol’ artist conspiracy theory. If you knew anything about art, you would know trying to get the “artistic community” to agree on anything worse than herding cats. The community, such as it is, is _highly_ fragmented. Your thesis is therefore of dubious validity. ---
**Author:** ![Knorf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/58956e/32.png) [@Knorf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Knorf)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 4:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/like-stupid-and-pompous-idiots-who-try-to-define-and-limit-what-art-is/602008/470 "2011-11-14T16:16:28Z")
> [@sh1bu1](#): > > yes it is. No, it isn’t. Why is it so hard to accept that there can be bad art? You’re basically just so butt-hurt about art you don’t like, you want to feel better about yourself by saying it isn’t art. That’s very stupid. But fine, to you, some art isn’t art, not unlike the way some people used to call other humans not human (except, you know, without the racist intention). Your opinion isn’t worth a heap of desiccated cow manure. Art is art, whether you like it or not. ---
**Author:** ![Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/budget_player_cadet/32/205_2.png) [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Budget_Player_Cadet)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/like-stupid-and-pompous-idiots-who-try-to-define-and-limit-what-art-is/602008/471 "2011-11-14T16:31:10Z")
> [@Knorf](#): > > Why is it so hard to accept that there can be bad art? You do realize that the concept of commenting on the quality art (on anything more than a completely subjective basis) completely throws the whole “anything can be art” statement out the window, right? ---
**Author:** ![Rune](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e68b1a/32.png) [@Rune](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rune)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 4:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/like-stupid-and-pompous-idiots-who-try-to-define-and-limit-what-art-is/602008/472 "2011-11-14T16:53:24Z")
> [@Knorf](#): > > Like stupid and pompous idiots, who try to define and limit what art is. Who the fuck are you to say what other people can think and say or not think and say? On art or politics or any other subject. You are a pompous stupid idiot. You yourself can call everything art, from your children’s’ first scribbles on paper to Treblinka as a large scale installation piece, as long as I don’t have to pay for it. The moment I am expected to contribute through for instance tax, is the moment I demand a say in what constitutes art and what art is worthy of my money. And you don’t get to dictate what I can say about various kinds of piece of shit and what I think of it. ---
**Author:** ![Rune](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/e68b1a/32.png) [@Rune](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rune)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 5:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/like-stupid-and-pompous-idiots-who-try-to-define-and-limit-what-art-is/602008/473 "2011-11-14T17:04:22Z")
> [@Steophan](#): > > The best thing to do with people who start saying “that’s not art” is to ignore them. That’s kind of what I think of the fools that think all kinds of worthless bullshit is art. It’s mostly a little incestuous group of circle-jerks that only differ from baseball card and napkin collectors or geeky Star Trek feinsmeckers by the pompous prices they put on their merchandise. Just ignore them. They’re not very interesting and certainly a lot less interesting than what they themselves think. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 5:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/like-stupid-and-pompous-idiots-who-try-to-define-and-limit-what-art-is/602008/474 "2011-11-14T17:48:25Z")
> [@Budget\_Player\_Cadet](#): > > You do realize that the concept of commenting on the quality art (on anything more than a completely subjective basis) completely throws the whole “anything can be art” statement out the window, right? I don’t know about him, but I certainly don’t see how that works. Care to explain? ---
**Author:** ![tdn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/94ad74/32.png) [@tdn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tdn)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/like-stupid-and-pompous-idiots-who-try-to-define-and-limit-what-art-is/602008/475 "2011-11-14T18:25:18Z")
I’m at a bit of a loss too. ---
**Author:** ![LonesomePolecat](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/a88e57/32.png) [@LonesomePolecat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LonesomePolecat)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 6:44pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/like-stupid-and-pompous-idiots-who-try-to-define-and-limit-what-art-is/602008/476 "2011-11-14T18:44:50Z")
> [@Zeriel](#): > > Nice copout, jackass. > > I resubmit the question: Give me a definition of what art is, and if you can come up with one that DOESN’T exclude a recognized master of art, I’ll happily concede it. > > Your last offered definition excluded Picasso, if I applied it to my own aesthetic standards. Butting back in, I said in post #404: > [@LonesomePolecat](#): > > I’m not trying to define art. I’m pointing out that there’s a lot of foolishness and corruption in the art world, and this foolishness and corruption has a lot to do with elitism. In other words, if you’re “one of us” you’ll understand, if you’re not “one of us,” you’re a rube. That’s what leads some to angrily insist that cans of excrement or a bunch of steel girders welded randomly together are not art. I never said I was trying to provide a definition, I never offered a definition, and I never said anything about Picasso. I see no point in trying to talk to someone who’s obviously not listening, but I was so exasperated by this post of yours that I had to set the record straight. Tonight, when you’re stamping out that flaming bag of dog poop that I will leave on your front porch, remember: _It’s art!!!_ ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 7:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/like-stupid-and-pompous-idiots-who-try-to-define-and-limit-what-art-is/602008/477 "2011-11-14T19:22:26Z")
> [@LonesomePolecat](#): > > Butting back in, I said in post #404: I never said I was trying to provide a definition, I never offered a definition, and I never said anything about Picasso. I see no point in trying to talk to someone who’s obviously not listening, but I was so exasperated by this post of yours that I had to set the record straight. You, by declaring something “NOT art” and saying that people perpetrating that “NOT art” are deliberate fraudsters and fakers and rubes, are implicitly claiming there is an objective definition. Your puny disclaimer doesn’t change that fact one iota. If people can be fraudsters and rubes, then there must be something that is fake, as opposed to simple ill-conceived or poorly executed. > [@](#): > > Tonight, when you’re stamping out that flaming bag of dog poop that I will leave on your front porch, remember: _It’s art!!!_ So by your own standards, you’re admitting to being a deliberate fraud, then? ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 7:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/like-stupid-and-pompous-idiots-who-try-to-define-and-limit-what-art-is/602008/478 "2011-11-14T19:35:40Z")
> [@Zeriel](#): > > So by your own standards, you’re admitting to being a deliberate fraud, then? Actually no he isn’t - he said “remember, it’s art!”. YOU remember - since you think everything is art. He doesn’t, but the sentence wasn’t referring to him. And don’t forget, when you’re stomping on that flaming bag of poop, you’re destroying art. You vandal. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Hamster\_King](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/8edcca/32.png) [@The\_Hamster\_King](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Hamster_King)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 7:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/like-stupid-and-pompous-idiots-who-try-to-define-and-limit-what-art-is/602008/479 "2011-11-14T19:45:00Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > And don’t forget, when you’re stomping on that flaming bag of poop, you’re destroying art. You vandal. Nonsense. The stomping is clearly an integral part of the performance. If he didn’t intend for the stomping to occur, he clearly needs to give the audience better instructions. ---
**Author:** ![Zeriel](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/58956e/32.png) [@Zeriel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeriel)\ **Post date:** [November 14, 2011, 8:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/like-stupid-and-pompous-idiots-who-try-to-define-and-limit-what-art-is/602008/480 "2011-11-14T20:12:02Z")
> [@Terr](#): > > Actually no he isn’t - he said “remember, it’s art!”. YOU remember - since you think everything is art. He doesn’t, but the sentence wasn’t referring to him. See, he thinks I’ll think it’s art, AND he’s presenting it to me as a gift. Obvious intent to defraud. Probably he thinks I’m one of those art elites who totally controls the high-flying, high-profit art industry with an iron fist. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/like-stupid-and-pompous-idiots-who-try-to-define-and-limit-what-art-is/602008.md?page=23) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/like-stupid-and-pompous-idiots-who-try-to-define-and-limit-what-art-is/602008.md?page=25)