Quote:
Originally Posted by dextire
So, you're saying a game can only be considered fine art if it's mainstream?
|
Art "being" mainstream and
being accepted as art by mainstream
society are two different things. In the latter context, yes. Remember Lord Byron? Alcoholic womanizing badass outsider that sent monumental shockwaves through the literary world, whose Byronic heroes inspired the entire
concept of the anti-hero, in other words arguably the sole originator of the modern cutting-edge in writing?
Byron was a great writer and he
was a the bad boy of literature in his time. He was also nothing more than one of the first 'modern' pop culture sensations. Same was Oscar Wilde, Edgar Allen Poe, and Lord Alfred motherfucking Tennyson.
As I said earlier, if videogames are ever accepted as art by art dealers, art critics, the majority of ground-level artists and (most critically)
society at large, it will be universally considered "art" in the Western world, which is the same as BEING art in the Western world.
Key term:
Western World. "Art" in Africa isn't considered
real art if it isn't manufactured in a specific way for specific purpose, usually cultural or religious. I remember watching a documentary on African art, and the narrator recounted praising a couple of local women for the intricate bead work that they entwined in baskets they were selling, telling them that it was a great example of local art, each basket being unique and beautiful. They laughed at him. In a friendly way, but
they thought that he was being funny. In their view, if it WAS great art, it would be carefully and respectfully duplicated. The fact that each basket was unique OBVIOUSLY indicated unimportance.
Threaded Mode