Improvments on Color Wheel Theory

So previously, I had made a post about my theory on how the color wheel could be utilized in order to help understand how to organize where genre's of art derive from in terms of the hierarchy of original major genre classifications. Alas, as I would only expect, there were some problems with the way that I had laid things out, thus this will try to reorganize a few of the concepts with a better description and some revamped pictures.

So for starters, it is important to understand how the placement of the color wheel idea fits into the entirety that becomes the hierarchy chart that I have just mentioned. The simplistic layout of the hierarchy would look something like this:

Fine and Performing Arts

Color Wheel

Division of Lesser Genre's

Thus, starting at Fine and Performing Arts as a singular title, we break into the three primary figureheads that are the basis of the Color Wheel: Music, Writing, and Art; which can then be subdivided once more into the lesser genres in various ways. I also point out that as of right now, the artistic qualities that pertain to scent and taste are not listed here on the color wheel level, for they would change the rules a little bit with how they relate to everything else on the color wheel.

With this established, we can now take a look at the layout of the Color Wheel, which I have now filled out the Primary (Red, Blue, Yellow), Secondary (Orange, Green, Purple), and Tertiary (RV, BV, BG, YG, YO, RO) positions of Genre's that are unique of each other and combinations of each other:

(Click to Enlarge)

Now that this has been established in a more complete and organized manor, we can begin to clearly see how the first major level within the hierarchy logically divided away from the concept of just "Art" to which I continue to label as "Fine and Performing Arts".

Interestingly enough, this division continues on to a third level, to which we can subdivide the concepts that have already been laid out here. There are however some things that are important to note when observing how this chart progresses to the next stage. First off, it is significant to note that there are many options for how the viewer may need to use this chart in order to find the proper subcategory that they may be seeking. As an example seen in the image below, when taking note of the subcategories that pertain to music, the choices available allow for numerous categorizations that are unique to the major subject of music; when one is chosen, we can observe the specific examples to choose from in describing our goal. To this last degree we designate the concept of the Tone Chart to lay out the various different qualities that the spread of genre's allow us to seek variety with, as seen here:

(Click to Enlarge)

Now the road map of the genre's can become more clearly visible for describing the exact location of where ones interests lie.

The curious thing now though is the reason we would ever even be interested in where we stand in terms of these locations. Well from what I can discern, this is not only a map to the "art world", but this concept also functions in a manor of allowing one to be able to point out the shape that the web creates of one's concept of art. For if it shows the locations of the things that you personally pertain to in the art world, then your definition of art will stand in relation to that webbing of interests, with special consideration to where more or less of the cluttering of interests happens. Thus, the unique shape that person "A" has on this chart in comparison to person "X" becomes what defines art as a whole: The visual representation of what your interests are and how you use them, in combination to how you relate to any singular other person's same understanding.... and in using the artistic representation of the color wheel even makes it fun.

I hope this helps to clarify exactly what is going on in my head... if you have any questions or thoughts on the subject feel free

Response to Andrea's Post

In response to Adrea's post on Hume, found here: http://momenttospare.blogspot.com/2011/03/on-hume.html?showComment=1302575018409#c4058554772067051527,

Personally, I think that the argument Hume poses for us is actually one of the stronger conversations for how to interpret art. The thing that is important to keep in mind when discussing this however is the concept of setting a precedent, which is exactly what Hume did best.

To elaborate on what I am talking about, obviously no single person could possibly be perfect at judging something with the concept of freedom from influence. However, a person can try to take this standpoint while taking in and interpreting a piece of art. By attempting to focus your view of a piece of art from the standpoint of no influence from other art, then you can most accurately attempt to see the beauty of the thing itself without preconception. You don't have to be perfect at it, but the better you are at this, the less convolution you have to fight past when judging art.

Additionally, taking this standpoint with the idea that you are attempting to achieve as close to perfect as possible, rather than perfection, then objectivity / subjectivity becomes arguable. Taking the standpoint of no preconceptions would mean that you would be judging from the standpoint of the people as a whole, thus removing subjectivity from the equation.

Do you feel that this standpoint makes any sense?

Color Wheel Theory

So in recent classes one thing that I had been considering was what the best way to understand what all of the genre's are of any given art form, and how they could be classified amongst other art genre's. Well after trying to just "think" of all of them in relation to how I have thought about them before, I changed the rules a little bit and came up with this:

This is an interesting device that I have been trying to use in the same fashion for what it was designed, with a twist of how it is laid out. The standard color wheel divides up and clarifies where every color visible to the human eye can be placed on a map of how to get there. Thus I concluded it would be wise to try and use it for this same purpose.

The way that the wheel is laid out allows for the most important "heads" of categories to be displayed as new colors that are a result of the combining of other colors on the wheel. This allows for dividing the complicated multi-genric categories in authority position, for when art and music are equally mixed we get Green, or Animation which would be an artistic film with just music.

Then, the next important thing to note is that the Tone qualities of color can be utilized to divide up all of the sub-categories or sub-genre's of the staple title colors. Thus when it is brought up that there are many genre's within "Music" it can be easily clarified that they are just seperate tones, not seperate colors.

What are your thoughts on this concept?

Response to Kim's Post

• In response to the post that Kim put up here: http://kimsartandphlilosophyblog.blogspot.com/2011/03/goodman-and-tolstoy.html?showComment=1301843217055#c3368452113288105104 This is what I hs to say:


• This is an interesting question you have brought up about Tolstoy and Goodman being similar in theories. I would say that they certainly do have similar views, but that Tolstoy isn't where we need to stop this conversation. I think that when it comes down to the synthesis of Goodman's concepts into similarities, there are three pillars that he pulls together into one:


• Tolstoy is certainly the emotion side of his theory,


• Plato's argument of the forms comes back into play,


• and Bell's concepts of aesthetics is the final piece.


• With the three of these theories brought together, we begin to see what the inspiration behind Goodman's work is. So yes, I do think that it is certainly a taste of Tolstoy, but I feel that we can't forget the other two in this discussion, for otherwise we begin to hide away from some of the other important things that are Goodman's philosophies.

Some Stuff from my Notes... Part II

When discussing the art philosophies that we have about David Hume, I have been noting the things that one would probably have to do in order to properly understand what the most logical objective vs. subjective solution is. What I have determined is that I disagree with the prospect that the book offers when it says that only one who is free of prejudices can accurately classify what is good or bad art. My though is as follows:

:: One must have an understanding that encompases all aspects of art in order to properly understand what good or bad art is, for only a blending of objectivity and subjectivity is what will lead you to the correct answer. Thus the solution becomes a mission to have an objective view to which we can all agree on the truth that it lays out for us to which we can begin our subjective dismantling of it as a whole.

:: If the entirety of art can be categorized into similarities in the same fashion that programs such as "pandora" or "genius" lay out music, then we would have a basis to which we can display our different taste and interests in art. What one person considers art does not necessarily need to agree with anyone else's in this layout, for being able to see the whole grid would allow to quarrelist's to realize that there are no similarities in their taste in comparison to the whole.


How does this sound?

Some Stuff from my Notes

So when it comes to blogging, sometimes I have trouble coming up with something new to discuss that I didn't bring up in class. So today I am going to put up a couple of my thoughts that I have jotted down during class over the course of the past few weeks.

First off, I have this interesting tab from the days that we had spent talking about Dewey. The concepts that I had been considering was the possibility of animals being able to learn how to communicate with us as humans so that we would be able to learn from them. I thought that this was a particularly interesting thing to ponder, for the vast number of things taht we could take away from different animals based on their opinions would be fascinating.

So, I began to wonder what would ned to be done in order to make this concept a reality. The first thought was that we would have to probably pick a subject that the animal would be able to communicate within, but what would be the most logical to start with? Math? Music? Art?

What would the view of art from a birds perspective be?

The Concept of Pianistic Perfection

When taking note of the video posted on the DKJ phlog, I had originally claimed (silly..ly) that pianistic perfection would have to be that of the Well Tempered Clavier, basing my argument on the concept that the piano would not exist as we know it today without the it.

However, I have since the moment I posted the Well Tempered Clavier comment been thinking about what exactly would fulfill the actually graspable concept of "Pianistic Perfection", and thus far this is what I've got:

:: From the musical standpoint of a flute player, whom has dabbled here and there amongst various categories and mediums of music, I think that the strongest argument for someone who claim's to have perfection on a musical front only has to truly be able to do only one thing, which inevitably has two results. Ironically, this one thing is that you must be able to respond to any given aesthetic desire possible when it is necessary to display that aesthetic to whatever audience it may be that you are attempting to come in contact with.

:: The fascinating thing about this single requirement being that the reason we as musicians typically lean towards a genre at all is that the aesthetics that become inherent with sed genre are the ones that appeal to us most in one way or another. Thus the second result becomes obvious, in that perfection not only display's that you readily understand and can translate any of the aesthetics, but also that you have discovered and display the one that aesthetically represents thyself whenever necessary.

What are your thoughts?