That main question, what is art? that we are addressing in this course is so huge and so broad, I know we won't be able to answer it, or even come close to figuring it out. However, the questions that have been raised off of this one main question have created interesting things for us to think about as a class.
The very first thing I thought of while discussing what is considered art was that who am I to judge? If someone is extremely proud of what they have created, and using the intentionality thesis, they intended it as art, it is art. Who am I to say that it is not worthy? The art world has an air of elitism, which is one of the main reasons I like the Intentionality Thesis, despite its faults. IT gives credit to those working as artists, for hobby or career, regardless of what they create, and regardless of what other people think. With IT, art has central purpose in the world as a legitimate profession.
However, this leads to a whole other question. How far do you go in considering something art? The funny aspect of this question is the art piece, Fountain, or rather, the urinal that is now considered one of the best modern pieces of our time, up there with Picasso's Guernica. Marcel Duchamp cleary was just trying to push the limits of art, and created a modern masterpiece by doing so.
Considering both aspects, from allowing every little scribble, or urinal, to be considered art or being an art snob and sticking your nose up in regards to what you include, both have their faults, and both open up a whole slew of questions that I actually enjoy debating. I never thought of myself as very artsy because I have zero artistic talent, but people can be artsy without talent, and this class is opening my eyes to a whiole realm of things I never considered.