Its Turner Prize time

[Mich the Tester]

Would you label it as art though? Regardless of whether it was interesting/aesthetically pleasing or not.

I don't really see the point of labelling it at all. Mondriaan's work certainly had an effect as part of an aesthetic movement; De Stijl and so he certainly contributed to design and architecture, which you could see as ´applied art´ whereas his paintingss were perhaps ´pure art´. Whether you like the results of that influence is another matter, but I live in a modern house, with modern furnishings and only a few, but very modern ornaments; I can certainly see Mondriaan's ideas in all of that and I like it.

[SpontaneousOrder]

I don't really see the point of labelling it at all. Mondriaan's work certainly had an effect as part of an aesthetic movement; De Stijl and so he certainly contributed to design and architecture, which you could see as ´applied art´ whereas his paintingss were perhaps ´pure art´. Whether you like the results of that influence is another matter, but I live in a modern house, with modern furnishings and only a few, but very modern ornaments; I can certainly see Mondriaan's ideas in all of that and I like it.

I guess I'm less concerned with labelling as I am with preserving particular meaning in words. It's harder to think when the meaning of words become diluted or confused, and I suppose (i've not really thought about it before) the point of words is to convey thoughts. Fluffy words => fluffy thoughts. Maybe.

[Mich the Tester]

I guess I'm less concerned with labelling as I am with preserving particular meaning in words. It's harder to think when the meaning of words become diluted or confused, and I suppose (i've not really thought about it before) the point of words is to convey thoughts. Fluffy words => fluffy thoughts. Maybe.

Think again;