Here i am making friends on social media ... i'm curious what the good people of Skullbrain think about this subject ... ART Vs TOY?
And just to qualify, i do think Sofubi can reach the level of 'Art' in quality of craftsmanship and aesthetics. But a toy is a toy, no matter who is selling it.
I'm painting pictures. It is art. I'm sculpting and painting an object. It is art. Now I am playing with that sculpture. It is a toy.
Genuinely interesting, but the original kaiju sofubi were intended for children to play with, as toys. So doesn't it follow, that no matter how much art you put into this kind of sofubi it's still a toy, played with or not?
To me, they are toys. I do look at the work as art, but I also personally don't differentiate art as being something specific. I look at everything being made as art, whether it's a painting, drawing, sculpture, toy, photograph, piece of furniture, music, clothing, car, knick knack, etc and whether it's hand made or mass produced. I know there are academic reasonings on what is/isn't art and that 'what is art?' has been questioned/discussed for a long long time, but I think it's subjective. For some people, to classify something as art, it's the amount of skill needed to make it, for others it is what the message is, for others, it is straight visual appeal (for visual art), or feeling it produces, or often some combination of these things. For me, how something makes me feel plays a big part in if and I get similar feelings from a painting by Paul Klee (throwing out a random artist I like) and a mass produced Luke Skywalker fig from 1978. To me, it's not the medium, etc, it's how the individual item strikes me, and I look at these items equally as art. Since someone somewhere likely feels that way about pretty much anything you can think of that is made, I'd say it's all art, in addition to whatever else it is. But it's still a toy.
Some toys are made as toys, some are made as art objects in multiples, similar to prints. This is a conversation that seems to come every 10 years or so , and it’s all subjective. when did vintage tin signs become “art”? They were made by a tradesman to advertise, and someone deemed it a beautiful art piece 60 years later. Are you playing with your toys? If no- then it’s an object on the shelf. this conversation could be had for anything niche these days : are comics art? Manga? Video games? People are being paid to make these things as entertainment, and not as an art piece. TLDR : it’s all subjective and it doesn’t matter. I’m in the boat with Bwana
That would be a good title for my autobiography! I disagree, most objects don't have articulated head and limbs.
I can somewhat agree. There is an artist or designer behind everything man-made in life. Cars, houses, chairs, etc. Down to the spork you mentioned. That's what makes art so difficult to distinguish. We can see art in anything if we look hard enough, but I'm not sure everything is art. Here is a more personal take. Working in animation, I see myself as a designer more than an artist. I'm creating something that serves a need or purpose. Yes there is an artistic process behind it, but I wouldn't define it as art. The end result, the finished animation, might be considered art because of the combination of style, design, and good story but it might not at the same time. Which is a similar fine line, like we look at with toys vs art.
Frank Zappa said, "The most important thing in art is The Frame. For painting: literally; for other arts: figuratively - because without this humble appliance, you can't know where The Art stops and The Real World begins." Sometimes the maker puts the work in that frame and calls it art, and sometimes it's the consumer of the work. Either way, James Bond is a lunkhead.
to me it is only this test: did someone make it? does it make someone (anyone) feel anything, at all? like my test for porn, is: makes at least one person horny and at least one person uncomfortable and yeah, *everything is art and porn* under this test. i dont mind a loose definition
woah, this thread took a sudden left turn ... plastic dollies and porn?! ... I mean, some of the stuff on the fugly thread can resemble sex toys, but let's keep it clean here people, it's a family chatboard.
Sofubi is a strange thing as it's completely in flux. A toy today is a museum piece tomorrow. That museum piece may end up at goodwill and into a child's hands as a toy once more. The intent of the maker, whether it be toy or art, is valid. However because modern sofubi lives in a community space of sorts, the end judgement is in the hands of who has that particular piece at any given time. I like to think of it as a mutual hand shake of objective and subjective. They both know what's up and are just happy to be at the same party.
what is your definition of an object? as far as im concerned its a material object that can be seen and/or touched. again- this is all subjective. the same could be said for Haroshi or Tkom- Tkom makes giant wooden sculptures with articulation- is that then a toy and should be cheap? at the end of the day none of this matters- people will pay a lot of money for anything the deem as precious, wether its a canvas with something painted on it, an expensive car, or a piece of plastic that is articulated. wasnt this argument brought up when that japanese artist made a soft vinyl version of his wooden pineapple sculptures?
haha, 'tests for art' brings to mind the only other thing where people have to decide if 'something' is or isnt 'something', i guess, idk i cant think of another
I think just about anything and everything created can be interpreted as art with artistic expression in mind. Cereal is created, but it’s not art ‘cause it’s not meant to be consumed as such, whereas toys, especially now, are. Michael’s(sorry to use you as an example, ‘Lazer) an artist by definition on literal paper, so why shouldn’t his transition into toys be treated as anything less? Even sofubi or action figures that were manufactured for the sole purpose of child’s play are heralded and displayed as valuable art to people as adults. Personally, I draw the line at hype. Once someone is willing to shell out stupid ass amounts of monies for toys for the sake of “Keeping Up With the Joneses” then it’s no longer about any form of art, it’s about themselves and status.
'Whether it be the sweeping eagle in his flight, or the open apple-blossom, the toiling work-horse, the blithe swan, the branching oak, the winding stream at its base, the drifting clouds, over all the coursing sun, form ever follows function, and this is the law. Where function does not change, form does not change. The granite rocks, the ever-brooding hills, remain for ages; the lightning lives, comes into shape, and dies, in a twinkling. It is the pervading law of all things organic and inorganic, of all things physical and metaphysical, of all things human and all things superhuman, of all true manifestations of the head, of the heart, of the soul, that the life is recognizable in its expression, that form ever follows function. This is the law.' A toy, is a fucking toy!
If it's in the fugly thread it's art, it's making you feel a special kind of way. If it's not, it's a toy.
The way I see it, just about anything can be considered art. The logo on your soda bottle is art, made by a graphic designer. Food can be art. A child scribbling on a wall can be art. That being said, art can be bad, low effort, amazing, hyped, overrated, sublime, you name it. That’s where we come in, we are the ones who judge. Toys can certainly be art, but no matter how you look at it, sofubi are TOYS. Toys can be art, but you can’t go and say this HxS sculpt isn’t a toy. It’s most certainly a toy. “It’S nOt A tOy, It’S aRt” is fucking silly. It’s both. And like all art, we can say this ‘zilla is overpriced, overhyped, and overrated if we choose to do so. Nobody’s art is immune from judgment.
THIS 100%. If it’s a status symbol, if it’s a ‘style thing’ or if it’s just a matter of lording over people because you’ve acquired it and they have not - then its value is fleeting at best. But… SOMEBODY will still be out there calling it art - begging for their paid price to be justifiable. e.g. Kaws 2 color silk screen editions (made by someone else) of god-knows-how-many-hundreds-PLUS-AP’s for 5~8k RETAIL. Fuck that guy and his ‘art’ (too far?) edit: as an aside I do so enjoy making plenty of TOYS that people can buy easily - and plan on always doing so. And I’m always having conversations with other makers (Americans and Japanese) who feel the same.
Yeah, I think sussing out who is applying the moniker "art" to the toy and why is worthwhile: 1) If the maker is doing it to justify high prices/limited availability = not good 2) If the buyer paid a high price and is doing it to brag about what they spent (and they're also probably trying to justify it to themselves) = also not good There are more scenarios, I'm sure. I don't think calling a toy "art" is a bad thing, but when you're doing it with the goal of making the item or the transaction or the people involved sound more important, you are following the Dark Side path to being a pretentious douchecanoe and maybe you deserve a little splash of that lava. "I do so enjoy making plenty of TOYS that people can buy easily - and plan on always doing so." - cannot agree with this more, @JMRampage (I want to say something about Mr. Bumper here but it's past my bedtime and my thumbs hurt.) The lunkhead who made this Facebook post built his collection in the days when vintage Bullmarks weren't easy to come by in the US. Now, he likely has deep regrets that he paid $300 for his Baragon 25 years ago, and resentment that he can't sell it for $600 today. The "goon squad" he was part of was all about flooding the GodzillaC Yahoo Group with endless "we have this and you don't" posts. Now nearly everyone has what they have, or can obtain most of it more easily and cheaply than they did, and they aren't "special boys" any more. He made this "toy vs. art" post and shared it to three different groups, framing it as "just asking questions," but I will not be surprised to see him follow it up with something like, "hey look you can buy all of the vintage Toho Bullmark giant size figures for the price of this HxS figure." He wouldn't be wrong but it would just be another flavor of pretentious douchecanoe-ism.
I think a closer parallel for the toys I really like is folk art. You have a creator who probably does not have formal training or education or deep Freudian explanations of their creations. They just make what they make because they like it or feel driven to create it. There is a handmade quality to it (fuck digital printing) where irregularities and quirkiness are just part of the charm. Not many toys out there pass this test IMHO.
