Coyote and his probably stupid opinions on art

[Don Coyote]

I think holist might be confusing "authentic" with "music that means something to me, subjectively."

That I take as a valid suggestion that I shall have to consider carefully.

Except what about all the music that I consider to be authentic but hardly ever listen to because it doesn't say anything to me, subjectively?

But I don't mean that as a rebuke, you may still have a point there. There may be some sort of overlap.

Starting to think my original assessment "authenticity is meaningless" is completely accurate.

I agree,  but then again I think "art" is meaningless with regards to classifying cultural artifacts.

I don't really have much to say about this.

I think part of the reason I don't like things being called "art" is because it implies a dichotomy between "art" and "craft" when as someone who has made "art" know that doing "art" well usually entails having a grasp on the fundamentals of the "craft" of the art. This is not to say that I think that "art" is bad, because I don't. I rather like art. However, I think that classifying only certain things within something called "art" is pointless to the point of stupidity. There are many examples of cultural artifacts from cultures other than our own that we classify as art when the native culture did not classify it as "art". Examples of which are basically all examples of Japanese art, of which historically the creators did not consider themselves to be artists making art, but were craftspeople practicing a family craft. Another example closer to home is WOMP. WOMP isn't art. It's just WOMP. But I know if I were to get anyone's WOMPs and put them on canvas in a frame and hold a gallery opening, I wouldn't even need to put forth the effort to spin that they are "art" because we all know that there are people who would consider WOMP to be deep and full of meaning.
But if I were to look at this from the viewpoint of "art is up to the viewer to decide" I guess I really have nothing to say that can adequately refute that.

[Mesozoic Mister Nigel]

Speaking as an artist (who should be studying science right now) craft is integral to art, but the idea and the originality are the art part. When I compose a photograph or have an idea for a sculpture or visualize a piece of glass I want to make, that is art. The act of bringing these things into existence, of manifesting them, requires craft. A good artist should also be a very good craftsman, so that when they manifest their art, it has impact or beauty.

I know craftsmen who are very skilled, but almost never have artistic ideas. That's ok; there's a need for people who can manifest other people's art. I have a sister who completely unskilled at coming up with things to make on her own, but is skilled at making things; give her an idea, and she will bring it to fruition. A fine craftsman is wonderful. We just also need to have people who can both compose art, and communicate or otherwise manifest it, as well as people who can make other people's ideas tangible.

[Suu]

I'm going to second what Nigel said. She put it in a way much better that I could really explain it.

My boyfriend is not artistic, but he's an excellent craftsman. I could say the same about Richter. They both have exception talent of making random and entirely useful shit out of thin air, but they don't actually sit and doodle on their notes all day like I do. When SuuBF is working on his coin designs or needs a pattern for some leatherwork he's doing, he comes to me, and I can sketch it out in about 10 seconds. It's a symbiotic circle. You really cannot have one without the other. I am hammer and nail challenged. If it's not just a nail in the wall to hang a picture, I'm lost, but I have some great ideas of shelf designs I would like. So...I pass them off to the BF and it happens.

[Don Coyote]

that gives me some food for thought. Thanks you two.