I have an internal battle going on. This battle is caused by the external world. What makes something art? Is it the medium, the materials, the voice or some other un-nameable thing?
I am by no means calling today’s blog pic art. It was a photo, then it was a cartoon and now it is more of a sketch. It started out as a photo. What if Monet started with a picture? Would that make his work less artistic? Would the tools of his trade make him less of an artist if he used a camera first? Let’s skip ahead to Ansel Adams. Would his pictures be as dramatic and telling if they had been drawn with charcoals?
I experiment quite a bit in my art works. My POD is a way to get a feel for how people react to different uses of the tools I have. Because I tend to experiment I have a different view of tools. My cameras, my computer, my Wacom tablet and my software library are all tools. Just as a palate, paintbrushes, bronze and wood are tools to someone else. I even incorporate tools of other disciplines into my work.
So here is the battle: Why would anyone consider the tool when deciding what is art? Why am I considering this? Does it really make a difference?