Art should be explaining?

[Семен Семенович]

Сообщение от Eugene

It is true, of contemporary art.

100 %..........

[Yaya]

Allena, art, which are written with a capital letter, Berg expresses some idea, for example, the idea of beauty. even Soviet realism was what? ideological, the party, the people.
the importance of the verbalization of ideas does not lead to the domination of the mind. not all communication is reasonable (contacts are of various kinds). Communication is intelligent, it happens to the soul. and the impotence of copyright existed in the time of Titian.

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от spigo

Blin! Well, very consistent!

Consent and without a pancake ...

[Glasha]

I think the word gans

Сообщение от gans

Art should influence a person primarily at the level of feelings. Therefore, no explanation can not exist above all art, which at this very level powerless.
I think, here as elsewhere in the need to seek some harmony, and reasonable proportions.

fully answer the question topic
relatively modern /current - including
impact on the level of feelings and are sine qua non - it was originally (for the lucky ones with an innate sensitivity),
or after the explanations of concepts-the "fog", otherwise - zilch.

It's simple

[Vladimir]

Сообщение от Allena

It turns out that the verbalization of the author's ideas in today's (actual), the art becomes almost a permanent feature of the works of art, and thus, it appears that the current (actual) art does not appeal to the senses, and to mind.

More precisely, and not say.

Сообщение от Allena

Only under the same umbrella is too often hiding absolute powerlessness, when the author tuzhitsya-pyzhitsya in an attempt to express yourself and to express something completely nothing.

Also very common. But lilacs today - is generally an attempt to deliberately dirty.

[Allena]

Сообщение от Vladimir

with lilac today - is generally an attempt to deliberately futile

Vladimir, in light of the current (actual) - surely, even not argue. But what now do lilacs do not write? That is different from the modern art has no right to exist?

Or in this debate, it is devoid of such rights?

[Allena]

Сообщение от Yaya

art, which are the key, always expresses some idea, for example, the idea of beauty. even Soviet realism was what? ideological, party, popular.

Yaya, in my view, socialist realism in this case a bad example. Socialist realism - the art, originally limited to very rigid framework. The fact that some artists have learned to circumvent these excellent framework - that is another story.

As for the idea - do not agree. To express the idea on the canvas, for example, it must be at least aware of and to themselves, however stated. Imagine an author who stands before his easel with palette in hand, determined to express the idea of beauty ... Ridiculous! And what, for example, the idea of "fugue" by Kandinsky, bottled de Stael? So why are they, unprincipled, cause such a storm of emotions?

Сообщение от Yaya

the importance of the verbalization of ideas does not lead to the domination of the mind.

Then object. If a work of fine art (ie, literary) verbalization of the currency, hence, its purpose is still to reach the mind, to explain the viewer (which is their reason in a position to perceive), what is he sees before him. Perhaps, then, when the audience will understand and if it proymet, then there will an emotional response, feeling. And if the words that accompany, for example, the installation does not appeal to reason, then why are they for?

Сообщение от Yaya

not all communication is reasonable

The title theme is the word "explanation".

[gans]

Сообщение от Allena

Vladimir, in light of the current (actual) - surely, even not argue. But what now do lilacs do not write? That is different from the modern art has no right to exist?

Or in this debate, it is devoid of such rights?

Not quite on topic, but there is still such surveillance. All the "actual" creators and supporters of this trend (Vladimir (a) does not mean I do not know about it), why some advocate the denial of any art other than "actual". I've always found it very strange. Maybe it's the mass confusion on the part of others? Or maybe my "lucky" with these people meet?

[Кирилл Сызранский]

Сообщение от gans

why some advocate the denial of any art other than "actual".

Normally ... Young, as a rule, people in his subject deeply, to another, yet-no time or desire ...

[color="# 666686"]Added a 39 seconds[/color]

Сообщение от gans

Could it from the mass confusion on the part of others?

And this, too. They're rebels, outcasts ..

[Yaya]

Allena, someone who, as Kandinsky understood very well what he was doing.
that at first: the knowledge or feeling - an endless philosophical discourse
Frankly, I do not really understand what we are arguing