Do you think that Art in all of its forms defines a culture or civilization or do you think that a culture defines its art???

I think that art defines an entire civilization. It takes an advanced civilization to be able to support artists and thier works and as such the more art you have within a civilization the higher that civilization is.

What are your thoughts?

I believe both- depending on the art and the culture.

i think they work in concentric circles. I think art springs from life springs from art etc etc.

I don't think that art represents a culture, to say that a painting represents a culture would be like to say a photograph with a picture represents a culture because it's got the eiffel tower in the backround, so it represents french culture? No it represents the eiffel tower as a tower in a picture and whatever the picture is of, shot by the person who wanted to take it for the reason's he had to take it, not at all for the reason's that the french culture would like photograph's to be taken. If you say that the french government sent three photographers out to take pictures that represent the culture of the french way of life, than only in those retarded cases would that actually occur.

Art generally represents things that occur naturally or natural things that humanity has affected. Art has always been regarded as Natural, and Beautiful. (see the artisan goddess Aphrodite/Venus)

A true artist can make his artform convey whatever message he desires.

Culture is basically the methods humans use to adapt to thier surroundings. Culture always comes 1st. Art is 2nd tier culture, meaning it comes AFTER a living culture has been established. Therefore culture creates art.

I'm not sure you can define art these days, so I guess that does say something about our culture. When an unmade bed is art (this is not a new concept), I guess it does say that we have taken great leaps from when artists were seen as craftsmen/tradesmen that took on years of training to get to where they were.

I think what we see in art in general is a direct reflexion of what is going on in the world today. Even fantastical surreal stuff comes from somewhere where it was created.

Interpretation changes art. That's where culture or society can influence art. When once galleries chose what they would display and artists could only sell what they sold in these elite galleries, artists followed trends and stayed within what the people at the top called 'art'. Nowdays, I believe anyone can have an exhibition and call it art.

p.s. I'm having an art exhibition next week...I'll let you know how it goes.

culture does create art, but art can also be counter culture. i think you have two sides of 'art;' the in-the-box fluffy cloud art and the out-of-the-box 'fuck you' kinda art. oddly enough an artist can create both types of art. for instance, in my profession i have to create photographs that, i guess, are in-the-box, but when i create my own art it comes from more of a 'fuck culture' stance.

What about cultures in which art is functional? For example, Grecian urns, or Native American beadwork? Just because it's not hanging on a wall in a museum doesn't mean it's any less a work of art.

Also, what the hell is this topic doing in a forum about Thanksgiving?