If you’ve been hanging out in the Artist Series so far, we’ve talked about Surrealists, Impressionists, Pop people, and that one painter who seems personally offended by straight lines.
But under all of that, there’s a sneaky question quietly raising its hand in the back of the room:
“Um… what even is art?”
Good question, imaginary student. Let’s ruin several centuries of philosophy in one friendly, mildly chaotic blog post.
First, the bad news: there is no single definition of art
Philosophers have been trying to define art for literal centuries and still don’t agree. The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy’s entry on “The Definition of Art” is basically 20+ pages of “Well, it depends…” (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
So when you ask “How many definitions of art are there?” the honest answer is:
- There is no fixed number.
- But we can group the big ones into a handful of recurring families of definitions.
Think of it as different ways humans try to answer the same question while wildly gesturing at paintings, movies, and that one performance piece where a guy stared at a chair for three hours.
The main “families” of definitions of art
Here are the big recurring ideas, translated out of Philosophy Latin and into “normal human” language.
1. Imitation / Representation (Mimetic theory)
Ancient version: art is good if it imitates reality well.
- In this view, a painting of a horse is “better” the more horse-ish it is.
- This goes back to Plato and Aristotle: art as a mirror of the world, or a copy of a copy.
Modern problem: this definition melts the moment you show it abstract art, glitch art, or a sculpture made out of 47 toasters.
2. Expression (Expressivist theories)
Here, art = emotion in visible form.
- A work is art if it expresses, communicates, or externalizes an inner feeling, mood, or attitude.
- Think: “painted rage,” “filmed heartbreak,” “sculpted anxiety with a marketing budget.”
It explains why a messy, jagged painting can hit you harder than a perfectly realistic one: the point isn’t correctness; it’s emotional punch.
3. Form (Formalist theories)
Now we’re in Clive Bell territory and his idea of “significant form.” (Wikipedia)
- For Bell, what matters are lines, shapes, colors, and their relationships.
- If the arrangement of forms triggers a distinct “aesthetic emotion,” then boom: art.
- It doesn’t have to depict anything recognizable at all.
This is great for abstract art, design, and that one painting that looks like a very expensive screensaver but still makes you feel things.
4. Institutional theory (aka “The Artworld decides”)
George Dickie and Arthur Danto show up and say:
Something is art if the artworld (curators, critics, artists, institutions) treats it as a “candidate for appreciation.” (Kate O’Neill)
In other words:
- If you tape a banana to your kitchen wall, that’s… home décor.
- If you tape a banana to a gallery wall as part of a curated show, that’s… art.
It sounds cynical, but it does capture something real: context matters. A lot.
5. Functional / Historical / “What does art do?” theories
These try to define art by its role:
- Art gives us a certain kind of aesthetic experience.
- Or it must do something previously done by past recognized works of art (historical continuity).
- Or it must fulfil some artistic “function”: expression, communication, challenging norms, etc. (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
This family is broad but practical: it doesn’t obsess over what something is made of or where it is, but over how it operates in our lives.
6. Cluster / “Family resemblance” views
These say: “Look, there’s no single magic property. Art is more like ‘games’ — lots of shared traits, but no one trait in every case.”
So:
- Some works are representational.
- Some are expressive.
- Some live in museums.
- Some are memes with better lighting.
They overlap like a Venn diagram with too much caffeine. Together, they form the loose “family” we call art. (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
Okay but… so what is art then?
If you mash these families together into something actually usable, you get a working idea like:
Art is something humans make or select, intended (or adopted) for aesthetic or expressive engagement, often shaped and recognized by a community that treats it as worth that kind of attention.
Not a bumper-sticker definition, but usable:
- It’s made or designated by people.
- It invites a particular kind of looking / listening / experiencing.
- And it lives in a social context that helps us recognize it as art.
What is the definition of beauty?
Beauty is one of the oldest problems in philosophy, sitting in the same VIP section as truth and goodness. (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
Very short version:
- Classical view (objective-ish): Beauty is about order, proportion, harmony, and clarity — something in the object that makes it beautiful.
- Subjective view: Beauty is “in the eye of the beholder” (your feelings decide).
- Hybrid view: Beauty happens in the dance between object and beholder — there are features that tend to be found beautiful, but the experience is still personal.
So when you say, “This painting is beautiful,” you’re not just describing the painting; you’re also kind of outing your own taste settings.
And importantly: not all art is aiming at beauty. Some art wants to unsettle, disturb, confuse, or just yell at capitalism for five hours.
What is the definition of aesthetics?
Aesthetics is the branch of philosophy that studies beauty, taste, art, and aesthetic experience — how and why we find things pleasing, interesting, moving, or intense. (Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy)
Key ideas:
- It asks: What makes something beautiful, ugly, sublime, kitschy, eerie, or “cool”?
- It covers not just art, but also nature, design, fashion, interfaces, album covers, the way your coffee shop arranges plants…
- The term comes from the Greek aisthēsis, meaning perception or sensation — it’s about how things feel to our senses and minds. (Membean)
You can think of aesthetics as the user manual for “Why does my brain light up when I look at that?”
How does knowing these definitions actually help you?
Great question, Practical Brain.
Here’s how this stuff pays rent:
- You get better at explaining why you like something. Instead of “idk, it’s just cool,” you can say:
- “I love how the color and composition work together” (formalist).
- “This absolutely wrecked me emotionally” (expressivist).
- “This piece only makes sense inside the gallery context” (institutional).
2. You can argue about art on the internet more intelligently. When someone says “That’s not art,” you can casually ask: “Cool cool, which theory of art are you using?” and then watch their soul briefly leave their body.
3. You become a more intentional creator. If you make art, knowing these ideas helps you decide:
- Is your priority emotional impact?
- Pure visual design?
- Concept and context?
- A specific kind of audience experience?
4. You level up your taste. Taste isn’t just “what I like”; it’s also your ability to notice. Understanding aesthetics trains you to spot subtle choices in color, rhythm, composition, symbolism, and concept.
Other art-related terms worth learning (and why)
Here are a few definitions that pay dividends if you’re exploring art:
- Form — The visual/structural stuff: line, shape, color, texture, rhythm, composition.
- Content — What it’s “about”: story, subject, theme, message.
- Medium — What it’s made of: oil paint, digital render, charcoal, marble, video, code, AI, your cat’s fur (please don’t).
- Style — The recognizable manner of a work or artist (e.g., loose brushwork, flat colors, glitch textures).
- Aesthetic experience — The special kind of focused, often non-utilitarian attention we give to artworks and beautiful things.
- Sublime — Not just “beautiful,” but overwhelmingly vast, powerful, or intense (towering storms, deep space, that one student debt total).
- Kitsch — Overly sentimental, cliché, or mass-produced “fake-deep” imagery; useful word for why some things feel emotionally manipulative.
Why learn these?
Because they give you handles. Once you can say, “I like the color palette but the composition feels flat,” you’ve already moved from vague reaction to useful feedback — for yourself and for others.
Are there more definitions of art?
Yes. There are:
- Religious / spiritual theories (art as a way to connect with the divine).
- Political theories (art as resistance, propaganda, or critique).
- Cognitive / neuroscientific approaches (art as brain-hacking via patterns and novelty). (PMC)
Think of definitions of art as different lenses. Changing the lens doesn’t change the artwork, but it changes what you notice.
You don’t have to pick one forever. You can switch lenses like filters… just with less skin smoothing.
A tiny, comforting conclusion
If you feel slightly confused, congratulations: you are now in the exact same boat as basically everyone who has ever thought seriously about art.
The goal isn’t to memorize every definition.
The goal is to have enough language to:
- enjoy art more deeply,
- make art more intentionally,
- and talk about art without resorting to “I don’t know… it just vibes.”
Which, to be fair, is also sometimes valid.
Want to keep going?
If you want actual art to stare at while your brain digests all this:
- Explore more visuals at LumAIere.com.
- Grab prints, shirts, and other shiny objects from this Redbubble collection. (Facebook)
- Browse the full blog archive at this profile (yes, even this episode will eventually live there).
And if you’ve got your own definition of art — serious, chaotic, or both — drop it in the comments. The more perspectives in the mix, the more fun this whole question gets.
Art Prompt (Surrealism):
A dreamlike forest scene built from layered textures and impossible geometry: towering pillars of deep emerald and shadowy indigo stretch upward like ancient trees, yet dissolve at the edges into swirling, feathery patterns that shimmer with bronze and moss-green highlights. The foreground hints at a clearing made of finely scratched lines that catch the light in soft gold, creating a strange metallic sheen. Gentle, atmospheric gradients fade from cool midnight blues to muted olive and ochre, giving the impression of fog drifting through a half-remembered woodland. The mood is mysterious and otherworldly, balancing calm stillness with a subtle sense of unease, as if the landscape itself might shift whenever you glance away.
Video Prompt:
Transform the textured dream-forest into a living, shifting environment: the metallic greens and bronzes subtly pulse as if breathing, while pillars of indigo “trees” stretch and reshape themselves with smooth, surreal elasticity. Let swirling feather-like patterns drift upward like rising sparks, recombining into new shapes every few seconds. Add hypnotic morphing transitions where fog glides through the scene and briefly reveals glowing scratches of golden light before dissolving again. Introduce dynamic camera motion — gliding forward, sweeping sideways, and rotating gently through impossible pathways — to heighten the sense that the forest is reconfiguring itself in real time. Maintain a mysterious, immersive tone that pulls viewers into a world just slightly out of phase with reality.
Song Pairings
- Hidden Place — Björk
- Into the Trees — Zoe Keating
Both tracks complement the slow-shifting surreal forest atmosphere with rich textures and a sense of quiet strangeness.
Hit follow if you want more art episodes, prompts, and pleasantly over-caffeinated explanations — and drop a comment:
- What’s your favorite definition of art?
- And which piece (painting, film, song, whatever) secretly rewired your brain the first time you saw it?