Ongezellig

>tracing the horse
>the grass and trees are custom brushes
>shit anatomy
xir xhis is not art xhis is dogshit

also this 100% you

People will call their pointless fucking drawings "art" when it has none of the qualities associated with actual art that wishes to communicate something more than its aesthetic appeal. Maybe it's the postmodern and the death of art as it existed previously, but that would imply the benefits of postmodern, such as aesthetic experimentation, none of which is present here.

>>25692
Cute maya
>>25693
>>25694
>>25695
Show your art obsessed nigger

>>25696
>you must be a game developer to criticize games
>you must be a musician to criticize music

>you must be fit to be a trainer
>you must not be obese to be a dietetician

>>25690
What a tank of a horse

>>25698
>if some one is really fucking fat but you're also really fucking fat you cant call him fat

>>25696
What would my art have to do with the truthfulness of my statements? Why are you defending this literal who from Xitter?

>>25701
Pretending there is one accepted definition of art (that just happen to be your preferred definiton) is where you lost the argument even before it started.

>>25702
I am not that guy doe there is two people
if he maybe spent some time looking at anatomy and not using a custom brush for grass it would maybe look decent
and I have no idea how he made that horse face look that bad while tracing it

>>25695
this is kinda true. I never really paid it much thought, but I don't really dwell on most art posted here, probably because as you said it's just drawings. Not to devalue drawings, but a drawing in itself isn't art. Many of the drawings have no point or pull, they're just the illustration of the character in some environment (if even). If it's practice drawings then fair enough, but how much actual art do we get?

>>25702
>there is no definition of art
If I put my diarrhea on a platter before you and call it art, would you accept that?

>>25704
Very little, because people with artistic inclination very rarely browse <100 PPD imageboards.

>>25700
>calling someone fat is like judging someone's skill despite having zero skills yourself
>>25707
That's exactly where the "art must be meaningful" line of thought has led to historically.

Finally a pretentious philosophical debate I'm not involved in

>>25710
Dadaism was a style that explicitly rejected meaning. The name itself was coined because the figurehead opened a dictionary on a random page.
The postmodern similarly rejects finding meaning and views it impossible to attain, striving solely to excel at the grounded aspects of art.
Movements that embraced meaning, such as the later avant-garde sought again to express something. When has ANY movement or style which sought meaning produce such "art" as I proposed?

Curious, what do you think constitutes art? A step further, what makes good art?

>>25714
>this shit on the wall symbolises the rejection by the historically opressed group of women and people of color of the western patriarchal rules that impose the imperative of shitting in the toilet
They don't reject the idea of meaning, just make up their own meanings, to the misery of everyone involved.

>there is no meaning, it's just a painting, sure it may be masterfully produced, but it's still just a picture of woman in natural environment

>>25715
I find that art in the current age is dying if not dead. However, having enjoyed art of ages past, I think it is valuable and should be revived.
Given that it is very much still dying, I believe it should justify its existence. My vision is art that wishes to communicate something only it can, something words cannot quite accurately describe. This can be done through the means of the particular medium, such as a painting(its colours, size, what it portrays and how), film(acting, composition, music and writing used at once) or verse(rhythm and associations from words).
Good art, therefore, is one which communicates something only it can communicate, and does so most precisely by using the means of its medium.

>>25717
Show me the shit on the wall. Show me an example of an art piece that does this, that claims meaning or expression where there is none.

>>25720

>>25724
This is really funny, I like it a lot.

>>25724
>This is geometric abstract style art or however, diabetes

>>25715
>>25719
My belief is that art is a piece of media created with the intent to further virtue.
Beauty and excellence are virtues; therefore a sculpture, for example, that communicates the beauty and excellence of the human form is art. The sculpture doesn't necessarily need to have any other meaning besides the persuit and expression of beauty and excellence, however it may.
Now for an example that isn't stylistically excellent. Early medieval paintings usually don't have great anatomy nor use perspective, however that is not the point of these artworks. These paintings often dipict Christ and religious themes. The point of these artworks is to further the Christian virtues. So using the virtue-lens of art, it does constitute art.
Art is good if the attempt to further virtue succeeds greatly, in the medium used itself and in the effect on the audience.

>>25696
>Cute maya
When is she not?

>>25693
His arts anyways are goed doe

>namedropping literal 'cordwhos

>>25735