Eigenharp Pico - anyone??

[Andrew Tarpinian]

On Mar 10, 2010, at 1:41 AM, Peter Korsten wrote:

> Op 9-3-2010 22:47, Andrew Tarpinian schreef:
>
>> imo, art is defined by it's, usefulness
>
> Nonono. But let me define my idea of 'useful' and 'useless' first.
>
> Suppose you break a window, and all you have is a 17th century Flemish
> master to put in its place to keep out the elements. It becomes useful
> then, but not the artwork itself; rather, the canvas has the use of
> keeping out the wind and rain. A blank canvas would do the trick  
> just as
> well.
>
> Art may have worth (perceived differently by everybody), and it
> certainly has a purpose, but it doesn't have a use. It just is, and  
> you
> can admire it, or loathe it, but you cannot use it for anything.
>
> That's the main distinction between arts and crafts, or art and
> industrial design - at least, in my opinion. At some point, one may
> become the other, for example if you have a platinum ornamental spoon,
> inlaid with $50,000 worth of diamonds. But nobody in his right mind
> would use it to feed the baby.

Looking at a definition on the net

useful
1 : capable of being put to use; especially : serviceable for an end  
or purpose <useful tools>
2 : of a valuable or productive kind <do something useful with your  
life>

Art can be useful to convey a message, meaning or to communicate. Also  
I don't see a separation between art and design.