There seems to be a range of definitions for this. On the web site for the National Gallery of Ireland, the two examples shown for objets d'art include a fan and a hot-chocolate pot, both having functional uses as well as artistic. The Musee d'Orsay includes furniture in objets d'art, again having a practical function as well as a decorative one. - Mark Dixon 15:30, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
This is a talk page. It shouldn't have categories, which I've removed. Has an article been put here by mistake? Ty 11:45, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
redirect to Work of art
Why are the redirects being undone? The redirect seems sensible. -- Clubmarx ( talk) 01:27, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
- Because that article explicitly states that the term was invented to convey a different meaning -
"The related terms "artwork" and "art object", used especially in American English, came into use in the 20th century, especially to describe modern and post-modern art, in order to avoid an older syntagma "piece of art" as a concept which was strongly tied with traditional aesthetics." Research Method ( talk) 01:52, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
- Not nearly different enough! The first line here "An art object is a physical object that is considered to fulfil or have fulfilled an independent and primarily aesthetic function." is a perfectly good description of of a work of art in the visual arts, which is by far the commoner term. What is a "syntagma" btw? No adequate case has been made for separating the two. I notice they were previously merged in 2006. Johnbod ( talk) 02:15, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
It is a different term for a different idea. A work of art can be reproduced, an art object has a material existence. Research Method ( talk) 03:11, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
- Sounds like nitpicking and word parsing by research methad...The consensus disagrees...they are not different enough... Modernist ( talk) 03:21, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
I think they were merged because the article had no text. Research Method ( talk) 03:29, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
Johnbod, Work of Art is currently defined as "A work of art (or artwork or work) is a creation, such as an piece of music or literature, performance, film, concept, computer program, that is made and or valued primarily for an artistic rather than practical function." Research Method ( talk) 22:49, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
- Only because I just put it back to that, undoing your changes. I suggest you learn how to read the history. What is your point exactly?
Johnbod (
talk)
23:20, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
- Why did you exclude objects from the definition, while aruing for the merger? Research Method ( talk) 00:11, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
- Only because I just put it back to that, undoing your changes. I suggest you learn how to read the history. What is your point exactly?
Johnbod (
talk)
23:20, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
- I have now set up a merge discussion at Talk:Work of art. Please comment there. Johnbod ( talk) 23:32, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
There seems to be a range of definitions for this. On the web site for the National Gallery of Ireland, the two examples shown for objets d'art include a fan and a hot-chocolate pot, both having functional uses as well as artistic. The Musee d'Orsay includes furniture in objets d'art, again having a practical function as well as a decorative one. - Mark Dixon 15:30, 22 July 2006 (UTC)
This is a talk page. It shouldn't have categories, which I've removed. Has an article been put here by mistake? Ty 11:45, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
redirect to Work of art
Why are the redirects being undone? The redirect seems sensible. -- Clubmarx ( talk) 01:27, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
- Because that article explicitly states that the term was invented to convey a different meaning -
"The related terms "artwork" and "art object", used especially in American English, came into use in the 20th century, especially to describe modern and post-modern art, in order to avoid an older syntagma "piece of art" as a concept which was strongly tied with traditional aesthetics." Research Method ( talk) 01:52, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
- Not nearly different enough! The first line here "An art object is a physical object that is considered to fulfil or have fulfilled an independent and primarily aesthetic function." is a perfectly good description of of a work of art in the visual arts, which is by far the commoner term. What is a "syntagma" btw? No adequate case has been made for separating the two. I notice they were previously merged in 2006. Johnbod ( talk) 02:15, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
It is a different term for a different idea. A work of art can be reproduced, an art object has a material existence. Research Method ( talk) 03:11, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
- Sounds like nitpicking and word parsing by research methad...The consensus disagrees...they are not different enough... Modernist ( talk) 03:21, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
I think they were merged because the article had no text. Research Method ( talk) 03:29, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
Johnbod, Work of Art is currently defined as "A work of art (or artwork or work) is a creation, such as an piece of music or literature, performance, film, concept, computer program, that is made and or valued primarily for an artistic rather than practical function." Research Method ( talk) 22:49, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
- Only because I just put it back to that, undoing your changes. I suggest you learn how to read the history. What is your point exactly?
Johnbod (
talk)
23:20, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
- Why did you exclude objects from the definition, while aruing for the merger? Research Method ( talk) 00:11, 11 November 2008 (UTC)
- Only because I just put it back to that, undoing your changes. I suggest you learn how to read the history. What is your point exactly?
Johnbod (
talk)
23:20, 10 November 2008 (UTC)
- I have now set up a merge discussion at Talk:Work of art. Please comment there. Johnbod ( talk) 23:32, 10 November 2008 (UTC)