Why do humans make art? - Page 3

Why do humans make art?

Hello Guest! Sign up to join the discussion below...
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3
Results 21 to 29 of 29
Thank Tree27Thanks

This is a discussion on Why do humans make art? within the The Art Museum forums, part of the Topics of Interest category; Modernist pov is to communicate a feeling that words fail to describe. Classical pov is to communicate the ideal through ...

  1. #21

    Modernist pov is to communicate a feeling that words fail to describe. Classical pov is to communicate the ideal through the material. Impressionist pov is the communicate what is seen. etc etc. In short, we make art to communicate.
    Jawz and Doccium thanked this post.

  2. #22

    Quote Originally Posted by nonnaci View Post
    we make art to communicate.
    This implies a sort of "other" in that communication is usually between at least two people. Personally, I don't create art to communicate at all. My art is mostly personal and I don't know why I create. I just do. It's an innate desire as much as breathing for me. I'm not a grate artiste lol, because I lack skills and patience to hone those skills so what I do create ends up simply something that came to me and needed to be done and without doing it I feel almost empty inside. I suppose for me it's to fill whatever void I feel at that point - whether it's through music, writing, poetry - anything. It just exists as a part of me and an extension of myself. I often don't see it as art either. That's something others call it. In fact, one of the issues I've always had with my family is this push from them to share it with others while I've never been able to understand why.

  3. #23

    I was discussing that with a friend.

    My opinion as a musician is that art makes us dream, that's the objective. Art doesn't really change anything, but it makes our existence more acceptable. I see various young friends reuniting themselves to sing, dance, do some rap battle, read some poems. I think they believe they are doing something different, meaningful.

    But they are doing exactly what art is meant to, they reflect on something that causes some emotion and tries to communicate that. Then they show it, people treat it like the most amazing piece ever made. Everyone back to their home with new, positive energy.
    Then, Monday everyone back to normal life. And that's how it goes.

    (Actually, my friend, who is a ENFJ disagreed with me, for her, it makes changes, it can change people and by changing people the world changes. But she is herself a counter argument for her vision. Because she loves books like 1984, Animal Farm, Fahrenheit 451. She loves punk rock, rap, music that is rebellious.

    All that while doing bachelor on business administration. So, while going to events like these makes she feel like doing something meaningful, at the end of the weekend she will get back to her normal life.)

  4. Remove Advertisements
    PersonalityCafe.com
    Advertisements
     

  5. #24

    Quote Originally Posted by Jawz View Post
    This implies a sort of "other" in that communication is usually between at least two people. Personally, I don't create art to communicate at all. My art is mostly personal and I don't know why I create. I just do. It's an innate desire as much as breathing for me. I'm not a grate artiste lol, because I lack skills and patience to hone those skills so what I do create ends up simply something that came to me and needed to be done and without doing it I feel almost empty inside. I suppose for me it's to fill whatever void I feel at that point - whether it's through music, writing, poetry - anything. It just exists as a part of me and an extension of myself. I often don't see it as art either. That's something others call it. In fact, one of the issues I've always had with my family is this push from them to share it with others while I've never been able to understand why.
    Something that sticks out my mind is that even though it might not be to directly communicate with others, even alone we are in a sense still social in our relationship to ourselves.
     

    https://www.marxists.org/archive/mar...ripts/comm.htm
    Social activity and social enjoyment exist by no means only in the form of some directly communal activity and directly communal enjoyment, although communal activity and communal enjoyment – i.e., activity and enjoyment which are manifested and affirmed in actual direct association with other men – will occur wherever such a direct expression of sociability stems from the true character of the activity’s content and is appropriate to the nature of the enjoyment.

    But also when I am active scientifically, etc. – an activity which I can seldom perform in direct community with others – then my activity is social, because I perform it as a man. Not only is the material of my activity given to me as a social product (as is even the language in which the thinker is active): my own existence is social activity, and therefore that which I make of myself, I make of myself for society and with the consciousness of myself as a social being.
    https://www.marxists.org/archive/vyg...sciousness.htm
    http://www.politicsforum.org/forHere, too, is the root of the question of another person’s “I”, i.e., of how I can know the mind of another person. The mechanism for knowing oneself (self-awareness) is the same as the mechanism for knowing others. Usual theories of our knowledge of another’s mind either proclaim forthwith its unknowability [34] or, by means of a variety of hypotheses, endeavour to construct a plausible mechanism that essentially is the same in a theory of sensations or a theory of analogy: we know others because we know ourselves; in getting to know the anger of someone else, I am reproducing my own anger [35].m/viewtopic.php?f=23&t=173900&start=400

    Actually, it would be more correct to say just on the contrary. We are conscious of ourselves because we are conscious of others; and in an analogous manner, we are conscious of others because in our relationship to ourselves we are the same as others in their relationship to us. I am aware of myself only to the extent that I am as another for myself, i.e., only to the extent that I can perceive anew my own reflexes as new irritants. Between the fact that I can repeat aloud a word spoken silently to myself and the fact that I can repeat a word spoken by another there is no essential difference, nor is there any principal difference in their mechanisms: both are reversible reflexes – irritants.

    Therefore, a direct consequence of this hypothesis will be the “sociologising” of all consciousness, the recognition that the social moment of consciousness is primary in time and in fact. The individual aspect of consciousness is constructed as derived and secondary, based on the social and exactly according to its model. [36].

    The excellent confirmation of this thought of the identity between the mechanism of consciousness and the mechanism of social contact and the idea that consciousness is, as it were, social contact with oneself, is the process of development of an awareness of speech in the deaf-mutes and partly by the development of tactile responses in the blind. The speech of the deaf-mutes usually does not develop but remains frozen at the stage of a reflex cry not because the speech centres are damaged, but because, owing to the loss of hearing, the possibility of reversible speech reflexes is paralysed. Speech cannot return as an irritant to the speaker himself. Because of this it remains unconscious and asocial. The deaf-mutes are usually limited to a conventional language of gestures that links them to the narrow circle of social experience of other deaf-mutes and develops consciousness in them by virtue of the fact that these reflexes revert back to the mute himself through his eyes.

    The education of the deaf-mute from the psychological side entails restoring, or compensating for, the destroyed mechanism of reflex reversibility. The mutes learn to speak by reading articulatory movements of a speaker’s lips and learn to speak themselves by making use of the secondary kinaesthetic irritations occurring during speech motor reactions.[38]

    So to be charitable to the point of communication, though it is essentially social in nature, our self-consciousness and expression is like dialogue with ourselves. Just like how one can write in ones diary which they never intend to show anyone else is a kind of introspection, so to can art be a means of expressing things to ourselves, externalizing it but then considering it alone and not for public display.
    I often feel like things I write is out of a need to get ideas out of myself so I can forget about them, a need to express in order to not feel swelled up with stuff. Similarly I create some things for a similar kind of release even though I might not have in conscious thought as what I'm wanting to express.
    Jawz thanked this post.

  6. #25

    Quote Originally Posted by Wellsy View Post
    Something that sticks out my mind is that even though it might not be to directly communicate with others, even alone we are in a sense still social in our relationship to ourselves.

    So to be charitable to the point of communication, though it is essentially social in nature, our self-consciousness and expression is like dialogue with ourselves. Just like how one can write in ones diary which they never intend to show anyone else is a kind of introspection, so to can art be a means of expressing things to ourselves, externalizing it but then considering it alone and not for public display.
    I often feel like things I write is out of a need to get ideas out of myself so I can forget about them, a need to express in order to not feel swelled up with stuff. Similarly I create some things for a similar kind of release even though I might not have in conscious thought as what I'm wanting to express.
    I can definitely relate to seeing myself as "the other" and in that objectively understanding myself as sort of an outsider to myself. I can't know unless I'm looking at myself as an entity separate from myself in order to study certain specific things. So valid point and excellent share. Thank you.
    Wellsy thanked this post.

  7. #26

    Quote Originally Posted by Jawz View Post
    My art is mostly personal and I don't know why I create. I just do. It's an innate desire as much as breathing for me.
    Another view is that the depths of the self is like a mysterious other that you get to know better through translation to another medium. E.g. one can explore a feeling or mood in depth by journalling it; putting a few words down on paper often cascades into a lengthy and organized depiction that tells me more than scattered short-term thoughts.
    Jawz thanked this post.

  8. #27

    i make music because it's something that's natural for me since always
    i draw because at some point i got a bit tired of making music and i decided i wanted to get good at it, also because i've been professionally involved in some graphic design / visual communication stuff so i was already trying digital stuff like collages so on
    i don't find it as satisfying as creating a song that i like but it's obvious that people are much easily impressed by it

  9. #28
  10. #29

    i can give us a sense of purpose and understanding to the iner self that we cant communicate, a qoute a once read was "music speaks where words fail" i cant remember where i got that from, but for music it makes sense. im sure you can extrapolate that out to art and it can just be seen as a way someone communicates their inner thoughts and "Feelings" on a matter. a form of expression that is too elusive for words.


     
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3

Similar Threads

  1. [Generation Z] Who do you prefer 3rd Millennium Humans or 2nd Millennium Humans?
    By Mrblack in forum Generation Z Forum
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 06-22-2018, 01:35 AM
  2. [INFJ] The "How do I make friends with other humans?" thread
    By methodless madness in forum INFJ Forum - The Protectors
    Replies: 27
    Last Post: 04-06-2015, 10:42 AM
  3. 'Did Humans make tools, or did tools make Humans?'
    By Kevinaswell in forum Science and Technology
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 09-22-2010, 12:19 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
All times are GMT -7. The time now is 10:13 AM.
Information provided on the site is meant to complement and not replace any advice or information from a health professional.
© 2014 PersonalityCafe
 

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0