- Joined
- Aug 8, 2023
*citation needed*Already, performing arts and art are different things.
I'll let Vladimir Horowitz know he is not actually an artist...
*citation needed*Already, performing arts and art are different things.
There are (or were, I don't know if they are still on youtube, I voraciously download) videos of some of our finest in practice or UA, without the music, the only sound being the scratching of blade on ice. They can be mesmerising and yes, artistic. It does depend on the skater and their gift for movement.However, I wonder if we would think of figure skating as artistic without the music and fancy costumes? Trying to imagine the discipline without these...
The difference between performing arts and art is simple and well known. You can read about it anywhere... Ask Google if you don't trust my knowledge. Performing arts happen live and are witnessed by those present. Art is intemporal and eternal. In that sense, music can belong to either. The composer is the creator of the artwork. The performer is the performing artist. Horowitz is an artist of course, of the performing kind, though he did compose if I recall so he'd be considered both a performer and a composer.*citation needed*
I'll let Vladimir Horowitz know he is not actually an artist...
Of course. This happens every day at the rink. Skaters will practice without music and costume. Normal. And yes, skating can be beautiful. I wouldn't go as far as calling that art but that's just meThere are (or were, I don't know if they are still on youtube, I voraciously download) videos of some of our finest in practice or UA, without the music, the only sound being the scratching of blade on ice. They can be mesmerising and yes, artistic. It does depend on the skater and their gift for movement.
if you say so. Art and beauty are such different concepts but if you feel like they are the same, no wonder we cannot agree on this.Well, in the end of the day, as they say, art, just like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder
It's not me saying that. As I said, it's a quote. And it is not to say they are the same but that they are both, different as they are, sharing the common feature of "being in the eye of the beholder". You do not need to be the same to share common features.if you say so. Art and beauty are such different concepts but if you feel like they are the same, no wonder we cannot agree on this.
But not always artistic.Of course. This happens every day at the rink. Skaters will practice without music and costume.
Sometimes, just sometimes... I would. It's not just beauty either (I recall the first time I saw pottery by the Martin brothers on Antiques Roadshow. Ummmmm. But by god does it connect with people) for me it's also emotion, connection, ideas and craft.And yes, skating can be beautiful. I wouldn't go as far as calling that art but that's just me
The difference between performing arts and art is simple and well known. You can read about it anywhere... Ask Google if you don't trust my knowledge. Performing arts happen live and are witnessed by those present.
In the end, feel free to call skaters artists if you wish to do so. I will not, and that's all good.
Art is intemporal and eternal.
the first reason why there is no wish to pursue the debate can be found in another similar thread. truly, I explained my view points for weeks in that thread, so it's not by lack of generosity or interest that I do not wish to engage further. It's simply because it's been done just a few months ago.whole post
the second reason is because the OP is interested in everyone's own subjective definition. I saw this as an invitation for everyone to write a comment or two... separately... instead of another opportunity to yet again, debate.
Well I cant argue against this kind of disposition but it just didnt seem to be present earlier. It felt as if there was a subtle implication that some more sophisticated understanding of things will necessarily lead to the realization that skating is separate from the conventional, traditional arts like music.
So if someone wants to confess subjectivism and say they don't personally resonate with skating on an equally "artistic" level as other disciplines without dogmatisms or subliminal condescension then its impossible for me to take issue, but when people just throw down the aforementioned musings and non-sequiturs ignoring my own carefully explained framework about my favourite art form as if invalidating my own artistic journey or sophistication it is beyond offensive.
But this is totally unencompasing and your appeal to authority is irrelevant. There are so many people who are high level artists and consider skating art. In regards to sport when I trained martial arts I had no interest in winning points or doing damage even in competition, I enjoyed purely the aspect of freedom and in demonstrating the most unique and creative showing of evasion and scoring regardless of if I win or lose (as long as I dont get severely hurt of course but that is completely unhinging on the aspect of sport or competition). This is an extremely common disposition across all sports as I have gathered. So your entire argument hinges on the presupposition that every skater foremost cares about points or winning, which I just cannot imagine is true at all. Why did Surya do that back flip then? It was an expression, truly, while throwing away any care about points or competition. So you can say that in theory the fundamental purpose of the discipline is to win points but that hasnt anything to do with how it actually manifests in practice.I will conclude saying that of course, artists. musicians, art lovers, are probably more connected to figure skating than other sports. Maybe my perspective is different because I did both to a relatively high level. I did competitive sport until I was in my twenties. Then i focused exclusively on music, which, I was obviously already doing from a young age. As a former athlete, I comprehend figure skating as a sport first and foremost. It's a question of the goal being sets, the objectives, the intention behind the training.
Is it straying too far from its defining purpose to console the heart?In my opinion, the art of music collectively would make a terrible mistake if it strayed too far from it’s defining purpose, to charm the ear. Or figure skating, to delight the eye.
Sharing my experience as someone who did both art and sport is not an appeal to authority because it doesn't lead to an argument with which I am trying to convince anyone. I am simply sharing my own perspective... why? Simply because I believe it does define my perception on the topic. Feel free to disregard it, and in that case, there is no need to engage further.But this is totally unencompasing and your appeal to authority is irrelevant.
So you were blaming me because I did share my experience and called it a sophism, yet you just do that yourself...There are so many people who are high level artists and consider skating art.
I made no argument about what figure skaters aim to do. I made an argument about how the sport of figure skating is built and organized differently than is commonly referred to as art.In regards to sport when I trained martial arts I had no interest in winning points or doing damage even in competition, I enjoyed purely the aspect of freedom and in demonstrating the most unique and creative showing of evasion and scoring regardless of if I win or lose (as long as I dont get severely hurt of course but that is completely unhinging on the aspect of sport or competition). This is an extremely common disposition across all sports as I have gathered. So your entire argument hinges on the presupposition that every skater foremost cares about points or winning, which I just cannot imagine is true at all.
To piss off the ISU That's part of the answer. Some artists are rebels. Not all rebels are artistsWhy did Surya do that back flip then?
It was an expression, truly, while throwing away any care about points or competition. So you can say that in theory the fundamental purpose of the discipline is to win points but that hasnt anything to do with how it actually manifests in practice.
Exactly, and I addressed that specifically:I made an argument about how the sport of figure skating is built and organized differently than is commonly referred to as art.
So you can say that in theory the fundamental purpose of the discipline is to win points but that hasnt anything to do with how it actually manifests in practice
What? I didnt "blame" you for anything. It isnt sophism its just fallacious. I did not invoke it as an argument, I invoked it to demonstrate the fallaciousness of using it as a basis of any philosophical analysis of the discipline.So you were blaming me because I did share my experience and called it a sophism, yet you just do that yourself...
I didnt say she was an artist. I said that she did it to express her emotions; that clearly people have purpose other than what the discipline is supposedly "built" or "organized" for. Therefore if she wants to express her anger or indignation instead of winning, maybe some athletes want to express love for someone or something in their program, or literally anything else, and there is extremely strong evidence for that being the case: how many skaters actively fight tears as they explain the essence of their programs? Are they crying cause they are so excited to get some points or something?To piss off the ISU That's part of the answer. Some artists are rebels. Not all rebels are artists
the issue here is that I am not using my experience to analyze the discipline but to simply say what my perception is.... read my posts again. I clearly wrote that to me, skating is not art, but I don't care if to someone else, it is... to each their own... I am not trying to convince anyone but simply sharing my perspective, which is enlightened by my own life... How can it not be ? It's a personal and subjective definition, just like it was asked in this thread.What? I didnt "blame" you for anything. It isnt sophism its just fallacious. I did not invoke it as an argument, I invoked it to demonstrate the fallaciousness of using it as a basis of any philosophical analysis of the discipline.
Read the paragraph above this again. I am sharing my perception. That's all.The point is you are profiling the entire sport on your personal experience.
Maybe you should.I have not done that.
I did.,. I repeat... To me, figure skating is sport first and foremost.You have not said "my disposition to figure skating is that of a sport and not an art",
that's your perception of my words but not what I said.you went further to imply that your personal experience lead you to the argument that the intrinsic essence of the discipline must be different from art.
I just corrected you, see how docile I can beThis goes beyond personal disposition but to make an encompassing claim on the essence of a discipline. If that is not your position then you can correct me.
I don't think that a musical composition or performance can console the heart without pleasing the ear.Is it straying too far from its defining purpose to console the heart?
The opinion that what? I suppose you mean a firmly held strictly athletic disposition towards figure skating as we have so cordially mutually specified and understood, since one could surely veil a problematic absolute statement in subjectivity, in that it is my opinion 1+1=3. Simply adding the elaboration to your post to be really sure other readers couldn't possibly get confused about any ostensive contradictions.a strong opinion that figure skating is not art
A great point!I don't think that a musical composition or performance can console the heart without pleasing the ear.
Conversely, there are many things that touch the heart that are not art. A newborn baby's cry. A lovely sunset. These may tug at our heartstrings, but they are the opposite of art. They come to us from the natural world, not from man-made aesthetic intention.