I´m not only skinning so You should know that I know. (Did you miss all pickies of other stuff ??) 

-Obviously that is not what I meant.

And here I thought it started with Wooly Mammoth's and Sabre Tooth Tigers

Well, yes....as dinosaurs like me started with cave painting....;)

I look really good in that last Image!

Zumingaz.

Naaah. It'll never fly.

Y U no fly?

I'm having flashbacks of puking in a Somers Point Art Theater when 'IT' opened a small box with a bow on it.......

First time I ever walked out on a movie.

My high school art teacher had a sign in the art room that said "Art is art....everything else is everything else." 

One of my degree tutors said to me that out of the 14 or so people on the course at that time, maybe 4 or 5 would actually understand what Art is, and out of that 4 or 5 only 2 or 3 would both understand Art and be able to create it. It sounds like an elitist point of view, but I agree with him.

Yes. Yes it does.

Especially when people speak of it as if it applies to just one medium, excluding an almost infinite number of other mediums.

well put... 

I think his point was that anybody can make a painting/take a photo/make a sculpture, etc. But that doesn't mean that they have created Art. Sometimes a painting is just a painting, a photo is a photo and a sculpture is a sculpture.

It's still subjective.

Look at the wallpaper gallery here.

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

I think the wallpaper gallery or any gallery here can back that up.

Look at Picasso, His work was referenced -  "What are pictures for?" he asked. "To fill a man's soul with admiration and sheer joy, not to bewilder and daze him." He was accused of never even having learned to draw. All by another artist, Alfred Munnings who thought his paintings of fox hunts and such were the very definition of art.

I think they both suck and would take a Van Gogh over anything any day of the week.

Sometimes, it seems to me the person with the biggest mouth or highest platform gets to decide what's what. It's the ones who listen to them and are afraid to follow their own hearts I really feel sorry for.

And tell my 4yo daughter that she hasn't created art when she brings her next masterpiece home from school. Or any parent that hangs any childs work on the fridge or in my case, all over and around my desk.

When she explains it to me, that 'this is you and this is mommy' and 'this is a tree and a pink rainbow', I see art. Because it comes from her heart and her imagination. To me, she is no different than any adult that posts here. I may not 'like' everything I see or even understand it, but I can appreciate it and what went into it. To someone, including the artist, it's art.

No.

They create 'art' by definition.

However it may also be crappy....;p

I didn't say that Art isn't subjective. And as such many things are in the eye of the beholder. I've known many women who were drop dead gorgeous, but they hadn't an ounce of beauty inside them. It didn't stop many men from thinking they were beautiful and trying not to drool too much in their presence. Many of Picasso's artist friends told him not to exhibit Les Demoiselles d'Avignon. They said it was horrendous. He exhibited it anyway, and the rest is history. I'm not a fan of Picasso either, some of his stuff is okay, some is crap. Picasso certainly wouldn't have got as well known as he did were it not for the fact he had a patron who spread his name to the right people. And when it comes to Cubism, only Picasso and Braque really did it right, lots of other Cubists regurgitated the same content, and didn't adhere to the fact that Cubism was supposed to be about making something look 3 dimensional while not using the traditional methods of doing so. Most Cubists failed in that sense, because what they created still looked flat.

Alfred Munnings probably considered something looking highly realistic to be the epitome of Art as far as paintings go. But Gustave Courbet had a different idea when it came to Realism. Basically he wouldn't paint something unless it existed. Something that was pointed out to me when I painted myself as a fallen angel. I was told that Courbet said when he saw an angel, he would paint one. My response was how did Courbet know he hadn't seen an angel. If we're supposed to accept the imagery that they have a halo and big freakin' wings, etc, then maybe we're looking for the wrong thing. Maybe we've all seen an angel, and I don't mean angel in the 'kind, considerate person' sense.

I don't deny that there are elitist fools dictating what is Art, and what isn't. A critic called Clement Greenberg wrote the rules as far as what is Modern Art, and what isn't. A critic! Some git who probably never created anything. A lot of Modern Art is pure trash, literally. But if it attracts the attention of the right people, and sells for thousands, or even millions, then what does the artist who created it give a rats ass whether people think it's Art or not. Art is a business these days, more than anything. I highly doubt I'll ever sell my own work for anything more than a couple of hundred, if that. But as long as I've done something that made me happy, and helped me say something about how I saw the world, what do I care.

Yes, I agreed with my tutors point of view. Just because I can make a table, it doesn't make me a Carpenter. But just because I agreed with his point of view, it doesn't mean I was one of the 3 or 4 he was talking about. He never said who was or wasn't an artist in his mind. And if he had done so, maybe I'd have disagreed with him. I seemed to bang heads with him regarding pretty much everything else. In fact, that point of view was probably one of the few times I did agree with him.

If you make a table [assuming it's from timber] then you practise carpentry.... however a 'carpenter' is a term for a tradesman who works in timber which presupposes formal training.

In that regard you'd be a small 'c' carpenter, not a big 'c' Carpenter. .... JAFOCHECK.

Me? ....I'm the bloke who has to tell the Carpenter when he's failing as a carpenter and to do it again....;p

Just because I call it a table, it doesn't make it a table. It'll probably be nothing like what would be considered a table in form or function, lol. Some half-arsed arrangement of wood would be a more apt name for it, I imagine.

I really had no idea about the upper and lower case 'c' thing. My first correction by Jafo. Yay!

Call it what you like...but if it performs the approximate function of a 'table' then that is what it is...or will be recognized as - by others.

I'm thinking I may call it Modern Art.

You forgot 'The art of war'

I see now we have a category called 'business'. What's in there looks just like spam to me.

lol tell that to Michelangelo. or the sculpter who did the esquisite sculptures(called the living sculptures of Pemberly) in the modern version of pride and prejudice (with keira knightly)...they are simply breathtaking... 

Keira Knightly is certainly fine art...