Talk:Fine art
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
I have just come here from Visual art and find that the two phrases are somewhat confused. In fact this one is a bit of a mess as far as the definition is concerned and does " a teapot that doesn't work is fine art" seriously deserve to stay? I shall attempt to tighten up the definition and clarify the distinction between the two terms.
DavidP 01:59, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Does anyone have a source, or a point of further discussion, for the sentence in the article:
- "Today the term is often improperly used to give any artistic discipline an emphasis that implies higher quality." Thanks. A.H. 3 Aug 2005.
Contents |
[edit] Dance
Dance needs to be included. There are a lot of dancers out there that would be very cross if they are not included in the canon of Fine Art.
[edit] "Arts" has been turned into a redirect.
Please look at the old versions of "Arts" and see if there is anything of value there for this page. I will refrain from tagging it with a "mergefrom". -- Fplay 06:29, 19 December 2005 (UTC)
== Nursing ==
I would just like to say that NURSING is a fine art. And to show that I will quote Florence Nightingale, the pioneer of nursing!
“Nursing is an art, and if it is to be made an art, it requires as exclusive a devotion, as hard a preparation, as any painter’s or sculptor’s work, for what is having to do with the living body – the temple of God’s spirit? It is one of the fine Arts; I had almost said, the finest of the fine Arts”
[edit] Animation
The word "fine" does not so much denote the quality of the artwork in question, but the purity of the discipline. This definition tends to exclude visual art forms that could be considered craftwork or applied art, such as textiles.
According to that definition, animation could well be considered a fine art - it is neither craftwork nor applied art and has a wide range of movements within it. For some persuasive evidence, I present this (a few clips from My Love, by Aleksandr Petrov). Esn 01:02, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Core meaning of the phrase "fine art," in my opinion.
I think the central, core meaning of "fine art," is as applied to painting and sculpture, as is generally found in museums and art galleries. The various other applications of the phrase "fine art," are I think more figurative, rather than being strictly literal. Also, I think "fine art" refers to paintings and sculptures of past periods in time in addition to those produced in our time. The term "visual art" I think more closely coincides with the term "contemporary art," that is, art produced recently. Along with painting and sculpture would of course go drawing, printmaking, and photography, and perhaps some other art forms I may have left out. Bus stop 02:35, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] FineArtAmerica.com
FineArtAmerica.com - The site is 100% free and is a great resource for artists and art galleries. It should be included as a valuable reference on Wikipedia.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.215.179.208 (talk • contribs).
- WP is not a collection of links. Per the guideline on external links, this seems to fall under several aspects of "links normally to be avoided." These would include:
-
- "Links mainly intended to promote a website."
- "Links to sites that primarily exist to sell products or services." (the site in question seems to exist primarily to provide onward links to galleries' and artists' sites)
- "Links to sites that require payment or registration to view the relevant content" (moving beyond the homepage to the "request a quotation" link or to partipate in the minimally active discussion forum - which are themselves discouraged - requires registration)
- "Sites that are only indirectly related to the article's subject." Yes, the site is about businesses and practitioners related to the general concept of "Fine art," but that relationship is at best indirect.
- In short, the site has a clear promotional purpose ("advertise your artwork, post your events, and more!" exhorts a link at the top of the homepage), not a purely informational one.
-
- I would also caution the IP-account(s) that have been adding this link using language again drawn from the guideline on external links: "You should avoid linking to a website that you own, maintain, or represent." The tenacity with which the site has been re-added after reversion by numerous editors makes it hard not to think there is a link between the anonymous adders and the site in question. That the IP in question is equally tenacious in adding a similar directory site to the Automation article only strengthens that likelihood. Robertissimo 13:22, 23 January 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Garbled text
The first sentence of the first paragraph is garbled. Perhaps the person who wrote or edited it most recently could correct it. There is also a hanging quotation mark in the sentence. Terryellen 16:53, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
