Ulvi wrote:

>Since there is no clear-cut line between emotion and rational thinking, I
>would agree.  But I would say that this is not the "function" of art, but
>more like the reason it exists; that reason being the fact that art is able
>to engage the complete mental "metabolism" of a (properly receptive) human
>observer (audience), including emotions, rationality, blood chemistry,
>..etc

Actually I, Bill Pirkle, said that in what may have been a moment of hasty
generalization but you have said above "the reason it [art] exists" which
is somewhat the same.  I won't argue the difference but I will defend the
statement "the purpose of art is to evoke emotions" which is what I think
I said originally (not sure, too lazy to look it up).

To understand what I meant you must separate art from craft.  Craft is
producing something that may or may be useful but does take great skill,
like the stuff one sees at craft fairs.  Art on the other hand differs
from craft in that, IMHO, it was meant by its producer to appeal to the
emotions.  Some Chopin etudes are mere craft, while some, the opus 10 # 3,
are art.  (I read somewhere that Chopin thought that this was the most
beautiful melody he had ever written.).  Calling something craft is not
meant to demean its producer or the work itself.  It takes genius to
produce craft also.I also think (here goes) that much of Bach's work was
craft.  But surely of all the music around, those compositions that leave
one profoundly touched, Wagner's Overture to Taunhauser, Beethoven's 4th
PC, 2nd movement, 5th PC, 2nd movement, etc.  must be placed in a separate
category from "great craft".  Apparently, even composers who produced great
craft felt the need from time to time to produce great art.  We see this a
lot where comedy actors want to do a serious role -i.e.  Robin Williams,
Steve Martin.

So rightly or wrongly, I make the distinction between art and craft in all
art forms (literature, painting, composition...) By that standard some of
Shakespeare's plays are art and some are craft.  Consider As You Like It
vs.  Macbeth.  This is not to say that craft is cheap, 2nd rate, etc but
that the producer had no intent for the work to stir serious emotion or
touch the heart.  Perhaps they wanted to show how many variations could
be gotten from a theme, or how a piece could be written without a tonal
center,or how a highly rhythmic theme with little melody could be
effective, (Beethoven's 7th SYM,2nd movement,) etc.

By that thinking craft would tend to appeal to our rational thinking while
art would tend to appeal to our emotional thinking.

Bill Pirkle