BF2S Forums Help Ty with his [Religion] essay!

I'm assuming you mean paintings and the like.  If so, I would compare it to the music industry.  Rap and HipHop uses samples, which some people would argue isn't really art at all since they're not creating anything themselves.

I would go further in depth, but I'm really tired and I work in the morning.

...if a person experiences a sensation from something that they later find out was fake (like a forgery, etc), and then they devalue that experience, that seems to suggest that it is the overall socially prescribed value-economy that is determining how one understands their experiences...

Thomas More bought his wife a fake diamond and never told her, saying that because she got as much joy out of it as real one because she didn't know it was fake meant that it really was a valuable object regardless of how it fit into the ecomony of his time... so the question is: was she missing out on something because it was "really" a fake diamond? certainly not phenomenologically.
However...

http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/largerhope/Forgery.htm wrote:

Consider another case. Imagine a piece of wood cut by a wood worker for the purposes of slitting into a joint of a wall. Imagine further that this piece of wood looks identical to an artwork found in a museum. Place the two side by side and they are indistinguishable. But it still matters aesthetically which is the one made with the artistic intentions, for as in the case of the poem, there are many aesthetic qualities – qualities such as clumsy, controlled, innovative, vulgar, simplistic, etc. – that can only be applied to the piece of wood that we know was made with artistic intention. Thus, to attend to it as an artwork is already to be aware of more than merely its appearance. To do otherwise, and merely to take the object at face value, entails ridding our vocabulary of a wealth of aesthetic predicates and, in so doing, limit the potential enjoyment that might be derived from the work.

Last edited by oberst_enzian (2006-09-03 19:11:44)

To sum up oberst's point, are you looking at it for its aesthetic value, or for its value as a piece of art, a piece of history?

whats wrong with forgeries: an original is usually a work someone used their own creative talent to make, where as a forgery takes no creativity and uses no integrity (in art)

are they as good as the originals: it really matters if the person deciding this knows that what they are looking at is a fake

if someone sees a work of art in a museum that he/she believes is an original in their mind it can be just as good as the original work of art itself. the only thing about this is that their opinion would most likely change if they were to find out that it was fake

another thing that you have to consider is that there is a big difference between a "reproduction" and a "fake"
it all depends on how you present the copy of someone else's art, ie if you make a more affordable reproduction of a classic piece of art, there is nothing wrong with that as long as you make it known that it is indeed a reproduction

i hope that helps at least a little bit
Darkfire

Last edited by Darkfire (2006-09-03 19:19:14)

"dont steal my art n00b"

Tyferra wrote:

Hey this is great guys, thanks a lot. Keeps my mind in the right place, (or thereabouts.)

polarbearz wrote:

To sum up oberst's point, are you looking at it for its aesthetic value, or for its value as a piece of art, a piece of history?

See that's the thing isn't it. If it looks the same then what exactly is the problem with it? There has got to be something as if you show someone of two identical paintings and tell them which one's the original and which one's the forgery and tell them to choose one for them to keep, they will always, (unless they're being smart-arses,) choose the original.

It's the same for anything though.  Think of it this way...

Say someone tells you they have the baseball bat that Babe Ruth used to hit his last home run.  It looks exactly like the real bat.  In fact, it's the exact same brand and type...made from the same tree.  The bats are identical, minus the fact that the Babe didn't use it to hit his home run.  Now, since you can't tell the difference, what are you judging the value on?  I'd say it's more about the history of the bat than it is what the bat physically is.  The same could hold true for art as well.

Don't expect much - this is an incredibly rushed job. DAMN YOU 2142!!
I'm still using heaps of what you guys gave me.

50 minutes left and 600 words to go.. piece of cake. I think I'll have to run to hand it in on time though.

polarbearz wrote:

Shivering under my desk nibbling on my dog's ear.

Um...ok...

I can multi-task...

Stop distracting me!!

polarbearz wrote:

What are you doing on BF2s when you have a paper to hand in in 3 hours?

If it was me I would be like.. Shivering under my desk nibbling on my dog's ear. And trying to write it.

you don't own a dog..

Opened!
This worked so well last time I thought I'd try it again.
This time it's a religion essay - due in 3 and a 1/2 hours.
------------
The question:
Should practices which are normally illegal be allowed when they are being done for religious reasons?
------------
C'mon, help a man out.

- Ty.