• EnsignRedshirt [he/him]@hexbear.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    The only categorical difference between a child’s painting and a professional illustration is that the latter has value as a commodity. If that’s how art is being defined here then we can dismiss this opinion as deeply unserious.

    • EmmaGoldman [she/her, comrade/them]@hexbear.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Exactly. Kids are absolutely making art. Ask the parents how it makes them feel when their child hands them a drawing of the two of them doing something nice. My parents saved everything and they treasure those memories.

      • EnsignRedshirt [he/him]@hexbear.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        I just don’t even know how you would argue that they aren’t making art. What purer form of artistic endeavor could you name than a child being creative for its own sake? Things like technical skill, novelty, complexity, etc. are qualities that art has, but they have nothing to do with the definition itself. If a child creates something with artistic intent, that’s art. Arguing otherwise is navel-gazing prescriptivism, the same basic argument as Roman statue fetishism and just as tedious.