Starship Asterisk*

[i]Art is anything that people call art[/i]. Dino Formaggio.

M. C. Escher would be proud of this.

"Eye of the beholder" — period.

Sorry, but all else is pure gasbaggery.


Toodles –

[quote="SRF"]I said No because although it's a quality photo and beautifully composed, its purpose is to record, not to express.[/quote]
Was it? Who says he didn't specifically take it cause he thought it would be absolutely amazing?
People who suggest photos can't be art are just self absorbed. ;P
I'd ask "why is it not art?"

Some insight from Pablo Picasso on Art/Science

"Some critics saw Analytic Cubism as an artistic counterpart to Einstein’s theory of relativity. The real world is not as it appears to the naïve eye. The permanent laws of Newtonian physics do not reflect the world as it really is. In fact, in the atomic substrata, all is relative.

Picasso rejected such a "scientific" understanding of his purpose. Analytic Cubism was not an experimental means to discover the truth in the world as it "really" is. A cubist painting is not some allegedly "truer" understanding of the world. Rather, as Picasso put it in 1923: "We all know that art is not truth. Art is a lie that makes us realize truth. At least the truth that is given us to understand."

[quote="darkstormcloud9"]

If the photograph was indeed taken above the Earth's atmosphere, where are the stars?[/quote]
[list]The sun is a star.[/list]

If the photograph was indeed taken above the Earth's atmosphere, where are the stars?

[quote="Beyond"]I never quite realized that the earth was in the reflection also. But Art has just shown through it. So i voted yes. That's Art.[/quote]

Yes, now I see that too and that's Art :D

Of course

Life is art

What is the red dotted relection to the left?

How do top that self-portrait?!? Cut your ear off?? Yeah, that's Art!

Many are the ingredients that make a work art. Unknown to most, others simply do not understand them. Yes I think one is necessary: unlike science, this work must be unrepeatable.
Muchos son los ingredientes que convierten a una obra en arte. Desconozco la mayoría; otros, símplemente, no los comprendo. Sí creo que uno es necesario: al contrario que en ciencia, esa obra ha de ser irrepetible.

[quote="neufer"]

[b][color=#0000FF]"So vast is Art, so narrow human wit"[/color][/b]
Wherefore Art Neuendorffer :?:[/quote]
Wherefore Art Neuendorffer?? Constrained... Oh, So Constrained.

Art is the other astronaut in the picture.

[quote=" http://spaceflight.nasa.gov/gallery/images/station/crew-32/html/iss032e025258.html"]

<<ISS032-E-025258 (5 Sept. 2012) --- Japan Aerospace Exploration Agency astronaut Aki Hoshide and NASA astronaut Sunita Williams (visible in the reflections of Hoshide's helmet visor), flight engineer, [b][color=#0000FF]completed the installation of a Main Bus Switching Unit (MBSU) that was hampered last week by a possible [u]misalignment and damaged threads[/u] where a bolt must be placed. [u]They also installed a camera on the International Space Station's robotic arm, Canadarm2[/u][/color][/b].>>[/quote]-------------------------------------------
Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1913)

[b][color=#0000FF]Aristocracy, n.[Gr. ; best + to be strong, to rule, strength; is perh. from the same root as E. [u]arm, and orig. meant fitting[/u]]
............................................
Art, n. [F. art, L. ars, artis, orig., [u]skill in joining or fitting; prob. akin to E. arm, aristocrat.][/u][/color][/b]

1. The employment of means to accomplish some desired end; the adaptation of things in the natural world to the uses of life; the application of knowledge or power to practical purposes.

Blest with each grace of nature and of art. Pope.

2. A system of rules serving to facilitate the performance of certain actions; a system of principles and rules for attaining a desired end; method of doing well some special work; -- often contradistinguished from science or speculative principles; as, the art of building or engraving; the art of war; the art of navigation.

Science is systematized knowledge . . . Art is knowledge made efficient by skill. J. F. Genung.

3. The systematic application of knowledge or skill in effecting a desired result. Also, an occupation or business requiring such knowledge or skill.

The fishermen can't employ their art with so much success in so troubled a sea. Addison.

4. The application of skill to the production of the beautiful by imitation or design, or an occupation in which skill is so employed, as in painting and sculpture; one of the fine arts; as, he prefers art to literature.

5. pl. Those branches of learning which are taught in the academical course of colleges; as, master of arts.

In fearless youth we tempt the heights of arts. Pope.

6. Learning; study; applied knowledge, science, or letters. [Archaic]

So vast is art, so narrow human wit. Pope.

7. Skill, dexterity, or the power of performing certain actions, asquired by experience, study, or observation; knack; a, a man has the art of managing his business to advantage.

8. Skillful plan; device.

They employed every art to soothe . . . the discontented warriors. Macaulay.

9. Cunning; artifice; craft.

Madam, I swear I use no art at all. Shak.
--------------------------------------------
Webster's Revised Unabridged Dictionary (1828)

Art: The second person, indicative mode, present tense, of the substantive verb am.
----------------------------------------------------

[b][color=#0000FF]"So vast is Art, so narrow human wit"[/color][/b]
Wherefore Art Neuendorffer :?:

Art or not, the photographer does live up to the shortened version of his name. Googling Aki \a-ki\ as a (girls) name is pronounced AH-kee. It is of Japanese origin, and the meaning of Aki is "autumn; bright; glistening". I am curious if the sun does look like this from orbit or if it an effect from the photograph? Ron

Of course, it depends on how one defines art. Since I have a very broad definition of art, anything that is beautiful and inspiring, I have no problem calling this art. In fact, I find art in nature; art is a human perspective on something perceived and is not necessarily something created by humans -------------- that's my bias

I voted no but if art could be defined as any creation that evoked an emotional response, then I suspect I should have reconsidered. In years to come looking at this photo, at least, the astronaut will surely have that.

[quote="SRF"]I said No because although it's a quality photo and beautifully composed, its purpose is to record, not to express.[/quote]

All art is merely a "recording" of an event, real or imagined. For example, a portrait is recording the event of someone sitting before the artist. Oh, but wait, you say the artist positions the subjects? True, that is part of the composition of the picture. You admit that Aki "beautifully composed" this picture. Composition, by definition is expressive; [i]the act or process of composing; specifically : arrangement into specific proportion or relation and especially into artistic form.[/i] How is this expressive? The words [i]arrangement[/i], [i]specific proportion or relation[/i] are subjective, so it is the [u]composer's[/u] own expressive sense of arrangement or proportion or relation. He was definitely and deliberately trying to express himself (see my other post on this).

So, why is this not art?

Its art pure and simple by any definition you wish.
Here are two:
1) He is trying to elicit an emotional response.
I have never heard of any astronaut/cosmonaut that hasn't been emotionally impacted at seeing the Earth from orbit. He is recording such a scene for us.
2) He is showing "the conscious use of skill and creative imagination especially in the production of an aesthetic object".
IMHO, this picture is not merely a snapshot of a moment haphazardly taken, this photograph was [u]deliberately[/u] composed. Aki is trying to make a statement.
Did you notice that the Sun, Aki, Earth, and ISS are perfectly aligned? He got all of them in the picture. Just a couple of degrees left or right would have ruined the alignment.
Did you notice that Aki was facing the Earth, "looking home" as it were?
Did you notice that the Earth/ISS take the place of Aki's head, as if the Earth were [u]inside[/u] the space-suit? "Self-portrait" of Earth/humanity perhaps?
Even if this was not a deliberately composed photograph but rather a fortuitous alignment, it would still be art. Many "accidents" or "photographs of the moment" have turned into great art - Examples are the Flag raising on Iwo Jima and the Apollo 8 - Earth Rise. Both examples are very powerful photographs and have spawned paintings and scultpures. If the painting/scultpures are deemed art, why not the originals?

No matter how far we venture into space we always find ourselves looking back. The harsh void of outer space is clearly contrasted with the inviting and familiar home of our species. Our planet is as unique in the cosmos as the face of one man (or woman) amongst billions.

These 3 concepts and many more are expressed by this photo wether the astronaut intended them to be or not.

As for if this is art or not, this is a gorgeous photo and those inclined to find meaning will.

Art is completed by its audience.

i think art is a mundane concept :| is there any extra feelings ( An internal state of arousal ) one could get beyond our pale blue dot :?: (extraterrestrial feelings)

It's a clear recording of a particular moment in science, but in a gallery of portraits it would have something to add. It's art.

Unfortunately, since about the mid-20th century, you can do anything at all and, if you can keep a straight face while doing so, you can call it art and you will be believed -- at least by some. This photo isn't like that. It's a record of a moment. It may have been a moving moment for those involved or for us subsequent viewers, but that doesn't make it art. It's skillfully done, but you would thank the technology for that, not the person who pushed the button.

The whole concept of Art as we know it today is rather odd, and perhaps indefensible. Many museum pieces now described as Art were considered to be craft at the time they were made, and were certainly made to a paying customer's specifications and taste. Others are only considered to be Art because a taste-maker of a particular time and place decided they needed to be kept for posterity, while many other works of that time and place were lost in obscurity, perhaps unjustly.

I suppose the most concise definition of Art is the old standby... Art is in the eye of the beholder.

Rob

I love this photo because it's one of the few pictures I've ever seen that contains every human in the universe within it's frame. All the humans on Earth and in the ISS and even the photographer are represented which I think could be a first. And I think almost everything is art so of course my vote is "yes" this incredible self portrait of the human race certainly is.