Yes, but kaiju sofubi was originally intended as toys. Form follows function, so in my mind, a toy can be art but you cannot deny it is a toy.
If you possess 2 ''art'' pieces, pick one in each hand... If at some point you feel like using one of the ''art'' piece to crush the other one while shouting ''kapow'' or'' wizzzz'' or whatever you feel like, my guess is that you have toys in your hands...
What if we consider the legal definition of a toy? It'll vary by country but items intended for children under the ages of 12-15 and labeled as such must undergo a number of tests and conform to certain safety standards. Products are otherwise often tagged with a disclaimer that states "NOT A TOY." It does not matter if it resembles a doll, has joints, accessories, spring-loaded missile firing mechanisms or what have you, if the manufacturer has chosen not to abide by the local guidelines it cannot be sold or marketed as a toy in the designated region.
Replace the word toy with the word art and you have what irks me about a vast amount of the highbrow art world. I recently stumbled across (an unplanned visit to a small gallery) an exhibition of Mr Brainwash's art. One £25,000 offering was what amounted to an amateur painting, the kind you can find at garage sales and charity shops everywhere for a few £/$, which he had added a basic stencilled image to - a la Banksy. The prints were, imho, ludicrously priced and the originals even more so. I'd like to believe he was poking fun at exactly the point made by @xSuicide Squadx , especially as the show proudly boasted The Beckhams and Kardashians, etc as some of his clients; however, it felt more like a money grab than a statement on hype selling art over substance and skill. Whatever the case, I'm inclined to believe that the definition of what is art is perhaps less important than what you personally find aesthetically pleasing. After all, who decides that one person, group, has the power to dictate what is art and what isn't? If I like something, I'll hang it on my wall, put it on my desk, on a shelf or in a case - what someone else calls it is irrelevant if I like it.
So this is my two cents on the subject for what is worth. I think that as many things in life, we are living through the changing nature of this items (call it toys or art). For example, the old sofubi factory that produced the Marusan Godzilla children toys, now is considered much more of a craft than a factory job. so I would argue there has been a change in value in the production nature and thus sofubi production has been elevated from factory work to craft work, due to the need for mass production. The same can be said about pottery, once a craft job now you can argue that is a art produced by an artist. Same for for wood block printing, and portrait paints used to be the OG photographers for rich people for centuries. So as this items are produced in much more craft like nature, these items might reflect the value of how this items were made. For sufubi toys this is just the production of the plastic we are not even talking about the paint part. All i am saying is we are living through the transition of the toy as a child play thing to an art form and that is why we can't fathom paying 10,000 bucks for a toy
Nicely put. Yes, the down side of toys being recognised as art, is the average person can't afford those high prices.
I believe when most people engage in discussion about what constitutes art they're consciously or unknowingly challenging whether something can be defined as fine art. There should be little to no debate whether toys are a form of art if you consider this Merriam Webster definition: the conscious use of skill and creative imagination especially in the production of aesthetic objects also : works so produced I'd say copies of any form—what is not an edition of 1 (e.g. prints)—cannot be fine art works in themselves but are reproductions of an original composition which may or may not be defined as such. When you move on to a system of manufacturing and distribution you are not in the business of producing fine art. I'd argue producing fine art should not be a business at all, but a practice. I think one can make fine art and be in the business of making art or artistic merchandise, but those are two very different processes and forms of expression. Building on fosa comun's comments, I do think there is a difference between an artist—which arguably anyone can be by simply creating something of aesthetic value—and an artisan or master craftsperson. Typically, it is considered reasonable for the latter to charge more for their work as they will adhere to a higher standard of quality. Of course, there will always be hype but that is something else entirely. It most certainly isn't a sure indicator of grade, the amount of effort that went into something, or the artistic value imbued in an item.
I love Marcel Duchamp and everything he did. The ready-mades, his paintings, all gave me some much inspiration on the subject of art and creativity. I’m so glad I live in the Philadelphia area and have access to such a large portion of his total work.
'Well, I don't know about art, but I know what I like I'll be a-surfin' in a swamp on a Saturday night Well, I've been to the mountain and it's just a big hill I guess I'm nothin' but a gorehound, born to thrill Even the devil gets dizzy at the stuff I dig I go crazy, and crazy, 'til I flip my wig'
Anyone can go to an art supplies shop and buy paint, a canvas and a brush, and can then create a painting as they see fit. Nowadays the same goes for the once elusive access to sofubi creation. No longer a whole lotta effort to get behind the curtain. So, a kid with 20 bucks and a person with a few grand can both make objects that some might refer to as ‘art.’ Most of these objects will end up forgotten - regardless of the medium. The vast majority will end up as landfill - kid’s paintings tossed in a fitful moment of house cleaning - soft vinyl figurines discarded by rich kids in Asia when the sun sets on the sofubi-style-era. The amount a person pays for the object hardly carries any weight in how the object is defined, nor does it necessarily reflect on the tangible value of the object. I’ve had $20 meals that were far superior to many of the $80-$100 meals I’ve eaten, and a 5 Euro bottle of wine in Italy is often roughly equivalent to a $60 bottle in the states. That should just about tie up all the loose ends in this thread
Hmm.. weird question because art is pretty much anything YOU consider art, like when you crack an egg on the sizzling skillet and it forms into the shape of something like a funny face/ whatever. Or your dog takes a shit that resembles a famous person. (That’s art!) Various interpretations of toys can be “art” too,.. subjective to the eye of the beholder. Art can be shit, art can be graffiti, it can be toys too, lol. Think everyone comes here because we appreciate toys as an art-form (to some degree) and even critique it just as so, quite often.
Take into account pre-established standards of value to determine if an art is an "art". Does it follow the parameters to fit in X box and how successfully. The parameters can bend and/or be replaced. Many artists created their own parameters and, if popular enough, they're adopted and it becomes a genre or scene or whatever hip trend the kids on tiktok are making dances to. Duchamp subverts all of that. Anything is art. This begs the question: if anything is art, is anything art?
In that case I would love to sell you my latest acquisition “shit on shingles”(it’s not what you think it is). Jkjk
Just heading off on a tangent (it's Skullbrain after all) . . . In my mind, eating out should fulfil at least 2 of 3 criteria to warrant a second visit: 1). Quality 2). Value 3). Service and vibe I don't mind if the food ain't the greatest as long as it's cheap and the place has a buzz. I can let crappy service slide if its awesome food that don't break the bank. I'm happy to pay good £££ if the food is awesome and the eatery floats my boat. . . . less than 2 and it's a one-time deal!
sounds like you are trying to find places that break the Fast/Good/Cheap paradigm “The rule of “Fast/Good/Cheap” states that a customer can choose only two of these attributes to maximize. The third, unchosen attribute, will naturally suffer. This is a physical constraint of a triangle, and a realistic constraint of a project.” Back onto the art tangent, I haven’t been involved for as long as most of you, hence this question: have you seen gatekeepers trying to establish themselves within the community? The classical art world is full of them: from the idea that you can’t be a respected artist unless you have been formally trained and attended a (deemed to be by the gatekeepers) prestigious school, to the ‘right’ places to present (sell) the art, to the publishing companies taking a large portion of the sale fee and controlling artists, to a multitude of other facets that regulate, commodify and keep the majority of the wealth where the gatekeepers want it to flow. Again, replace art with any commercial tangible and to one degree or another commodification of the process will set in but given we are debating Art or Toy, I wondered if anyone felt that there were signs of the above creeping into the industry we are discussing?
I didn't realise this was a 'thing', but yeah! Although I'm rarely in a rush these days, so the experience > speed.
Here's a good Art vs Toy example ... its certainly priced as if it was more 'ART' than TOY. I like the sculpt. I like it on clear. I like the paints. ... but it just looks like a TOY repurposed as a light shade. If i was going to be unkind, i'd say it looks a bit silly. Also, i assume it would have to be an LED bulb or wouldn't it go soft due to the heat?
The price gets you the entire lamp, not just the kaiju shade. And yes, you do want a bulb that does not generate a lot of heat. View this post on Instagram
The dino shade rules. I have the unpainted clear one and it is a perfect complement to my toy display. I had to take it to a local lamp guy to get the plug changed to an american one, but only cost $15. The guy mentioned that the fixture was really high quality, and you can tell. All metal, no plastic pieces.
Fair enough, still looks like a toy forced onto a light fixture to me. If it was glass, that would be more impressive.
