Upon recent contemplation, I have come to the conclusion that these three ideas seem to be what I base my life around, and all three still remain a complete mystery to me. I've spent my entire life chasing these things, climbing their mountains in hope of conquering them; understanding them. Yet everytime I move closer to finally grasping one, it moves further and further away from me until I'm faced with another long, confusing, lonesome journey.

What is art?

What is freedom?

What is love?

I'd love to hear people's thoughts on these ideas, and not just basic, Miriam Webster definitions, but in-depth thoughts and analysis, or even personal experiences that tie in with those themes.

I just had a long conversation with my girlfriend about love.

I personally came to the conclusion that whether I initially realized it or not, I had more fun chasing love and sex than actually having it. There's something about the allure of that imaginary perfect relationship that is just fantastic, and chasing that dream is fantastic. Actually being in a relationship with someone you love, or at least think you love, is not as much fun.

I definitely think that this restlessness is something that I'll probably lose with age, whether it be due to lack of initiative or just maturation, but I often feel as though right now, at my age, I'm not really interested in being in a relationship.

There's really no answer to these questions, it's all up to individual perception and interpretation.

Everybody's going to have a different 'personal' story to tell, such as, "I never knew what love was until..." , but lovely as they may be I don't know if they will help you.

What I'm wondering is, why have you, as you say...been 'chasing these things' your entire life? Why is your goal to 'conquer' and 'understand' them?

Because if what you say is true...then every single BB member can reply and it probably still wouldn't satisfy your own personal quest.

Good luck.

Apple

Love is usually temporary (not teenage infatuation) and freedom pretty much doesn't exist, at least without consequences.

As for art, that's the only certain idea there. Some people could love each other all through their lives, some deteriorate.

For some reason they intrigue me. They are more or less my reasons for living.

I'm not looking to satisfy my personal quest in this thread...just simply read others' thoughts on what has been taking up the most space in my mind for a while now.

If you base your life around them then you probably already know what each is to you...but may be too self-consumed to realize it (or want to realize it).

From your opening post it appears you are more intrigued by 'the chase' than anything else.

One person's inerpretation of 'art' can be another's idea of garbage.

One person's idea of 'love' can be another's idea of posession and self-indulgence.

Freedom to one man can mean anarchy to another.

Unless you want to look up the one-dimensional definitions in a dictionary (which I doubt)...there are no real answers to your questions. But I'll give it a whirl and tell one story that to me is the ultimate definition of love.

The daughter of my dear friends was Bat Mitzvah'd several years ago. She looked so beautiful in her powder-blue gown. After the formal reception I was invited to a small gathering at the house for a few close friends & relatives.

While chatting with my friend in her bedroom, I happened to notice another, purple or 'eggplant' colored gown hanging on the wall and asked about it. Turns out that was the gown the daughter had originally planned to wear. She had tried on so many over the months and none was really perfect but this one came the closest.

Then...about two weeks before the event they spotted this powder blue gown. The girl tried it on...it fit perfectly and looked perfect on her. The mother saw in her child's eyes that this was the one. But there was that other dress at home...it had already been altered and was non-returnable.

Mother called dad at work and told him the story. What to do? These people certainly aren't poor but in addition to the cost of the Bat Mitzvah itself, it had NOT been in their plans to purchase TWO $500+ dresses one of which would not be worn.

Without missing a beat he simply said...buy the dress.

This was to be their daughter's special day and they wanted her to to have only the best memories of it. They knew their girl, she would NOT have made a fuss knowing she already had a dress, but it was clear she loved this new one. To have had her wear the first dress after finding the second would have left...as my friend put it...a 'bad feeling' in the pit of their stomachs.

I really don't know why I cherish this particular story so much. It's not a big deal. Parents have done far greater things, made far greater sacrifices for their children down through the ages.

I think it's the simplicity of this one that gets me. Nothing earth-shattering, by no means a life-or-death decision. Just a simple, everyday gesture of love...amidst all the glamour, pomp and seriousness of the 'main' celebration...to a little girl from her mom & dad.

That 'eggplant' gown was a very pretty dress.
The powder blue gown was 'love'.

Apple

Great topic DVC. Like you I too have been chasing freedom and love all my life. Chasing because I haven't got to the desired state in either of these. So let me share with you what I feel about these.
Freedom is possible only when I have nothing to lose. As soon as I acquire a bit of something, I am afraid of letting it go. And there ends the freedom. I compromise, just to retain what I have. But I have been in a state where I was totally free, basically because I was totally screwed. And some of my most successful times followed it because I just didn't care about losing anything and took big steps.
Love...here another person is involved. So I am in very little control of the outcome. Only thing that I can assure is to love genuinely and generously. But I do not believe in unconditional love or true love or whatever. Love is a selfish feeling and looking at it as a sacred emotion is just being naive.
Art is something I never had to chase. I do not have a career in arts, so I do not feel the need to acquire or conquer art. I am happy that art brings about so much of beauty and joy. To be a part of any artistic effort is something great, I live for those rare moments.

Probably the reason you're baffled is that all three are relative terms, and are very personal:
--Art is in the eye (or ear) of the beholder.
--Love is in the heart of the lover (even if the other person doesn't reciprocate).
--Freedom is in the mind of the individual. As Kris Kristofferson wrote, "Freedom's just another word for nothing left to lose." Some political prisoners have said that they've never felt so free as when the authorities stripped them of all rights and privileges and threw them into solitary confinement.
I'll give you a rather banal personal example:
Years ago, I had a friend who owned an antiques store in NYC's Greenwich Village. I was pursuing a corporate career with a very large company. I envied my friend his "unconventional," "bohemian," "artistic" "freedom," while I felt like I was a "corporate slave." But after spending a nice Sunday afternoon with him, I realized that, the next day, he had to open his little store and sit there on a stool in a 200 square foot space for twelve hours waiting for people to come in off the street. I, on the other hand, could come in late and leave early without anyone saying boo to me, choose my work assignments, and spend my day interacting with dozens of interesting people from all over the world. That's when I started thinking that I was "free" and my friend was the "slave." The reality was somewhere in between. As it happened, I sacrificed some of what we'd conventionally call "freedom" to keep my nose to the grindstone in that corporate career. But it enabled me to retire very young, with enough money to be free to do whatever I want to do. To me, that's "freedom."

how many decades are we given ?

I absolutely agree. And, no, it's not an age-related thing, IMO. Human beings tend to be thrilled when they still have to reach something (not specifically love, just anything), the fun is mostly there! The actual achievment/possession is often less thrilling than the desire itself.

That's not always the case, Lavinia. Sometimes the experience itself is just as good as how you thought it would be.


About the original question(s):

My thoughts, my answers would be too long to type here. I'd really love to discuss these things in reality, to express emotions and such, but I couldn't express my thoughts by writing. At least not within a reasonable amount of time.
I also have written an essay about "What is art" once, but it's in Dutch, and I'm too lazy to translate.

Freedom is the possibility to be lazy.

Love is something you can feel: being in love is a whirlwind of endorphines, neurotransmittors, cocaine, ...

Art is the least objective thing of these three.

sure. That's why I wrote "tend to be" instead of "are" But at least in my experience, the achievement of something is almost always inferior to the expectations. Dreams are in fact the elan vital to keep us alive. Experiences are about reality. And how can reality cope with dreams?

I don't agree. None of these things is objective. They are in fact the most subjective concepts I can think of!

Art is what arouses your mind beyond just the visual. If you’re in a gallery anytime soon, stop and spend about 5 minutes (or longer) with as many works as you can. Don't simply look at them and walk on by. Just observe a painting for awhile and see what happens. See if it makes you think. See if it disgusts you. See if you enjoy it.

Art is a love and love is an art. The skill in the way one handles the matters of the heart is the same as some painters. Some have great skill and some are awful. Some can paint great works that last centuries and never fade. Some can't. Some can love a lifetime. Some can't.

Art is a skill and love is a skill. Everyone can draw just as everyone can love. However, some draw better than others just as some love better than others.

I don't agree. None of these things is objective. They are in fact the most subjective concepts I can think of! [/b][/quote]That's why I said 'least' and didn't use absolute terms.

A piece of art is sometimes thought of as 'good' (insert better adjective here) by a great number of people. The same happens much less when it's about love.

Wow, this is deep.

I agree. Great thread. Keep the replies comin' you guys.

No really, I have new perspective which is affecting my way of thinking.

An artist is always trying to unlock the images and ideas trapped in his/her mind. The constant honing of his/her skills brings that idea or image closer to true conception.

However, many artists suffer from trying to make things perfect. And many are tormented by the beauty in their minds that they can't create in the real world.

Love is similar. The ideals of a happy relationship are trapped up in the mind and it can be hard to express it the right way to make things perfect. The expression of love is like the expression of art. They are ideas and images in the mind that many people want to get out into life.

A painter will labor over a painting for years to make it as best as possible according to his/her skills. And a lover will spend time also to get everything right and make everything come to fruition.

But if a person can't paint, then the image is trapped. And if a person can't love, then they suffer.

For a nice perception of art, read Yasmina Reza's play "Art".

As for love and freedom: I'd be a fool to say I can comprehend any idea what either of the two could possibly mean. But I know one thing, it all depends on whom you ask. Each person will have a different answer. I would generally ask older people what they think. Not just smart old people either, but individuals from all ends of the spectrum.

The Doc

Bottom Line: Ask me again in 50 years.

I disagree. But then, if I agreed, I wouldn't feel content pursuing these Truths.

The reason why I love all three, or the idea of all three, is that, as this thread shows, the endless "depth" which each one represents can only be justified with a "it's different for everybody" type of explanation.

And I don't think we're reading deep responses at all, because any response comes with a preface, a submission to subjectivity, a confession that these thoughts are below the concepts they're trying to comprehend.

What we're reading here are replies and thoughts which aren't deep at all.

Art...Freedom...Love...

They are "deep"; because all of their "answers" are "shallow".

Can answers on these questions be deep? Is it possible, at all?
With a scientific explanaition perhaps?

Then can be...but don't necessarily need to be 'deep'.

Anyone who actually tries to be deep with their answers or attempt to find some 'deep' meaning in any & every reply...is simply missing the point.

Apple

First of all, Mick, this sentence of yours made me think of that line in Sunset BLv, when Norma Desmond tells Joe Gillis "I am big. It's the pictures that got small"!

Actually there is no answer. Neither deep nor shallow. If you mean a philosophical one. But I think DVC would like to read about our own experiences/perceptions of the three, that is in fact the only way we can actually answer.

Needless to say I'd be delighted to read yours.

You'll most likely answer the same way.

You'll most likely answer the same way. [/b][/quote]Wo how, this is an interesting sentence.
As someone who has the same age as Ferro, I am very interested in why you said that.

Wow this is a great idea for a thread.

Love is a tough one because I believe more or less that it is something that takes on different qualities depending on the situation. Beyond the Greek concept of Eros (sexual love) and Philos (friendship or brotherly typle love) and Agape (the love the Divine has for humanity) there are other aspects of love that cannot be defined. A child "loves" his or her parent very differently than the way a parent loves his or her child. Can you love your dog? Can you love a piece of clithing? I dont know. Love is often confused with some sort of inner issue....and I am struggling here ... but an example is the "love" a stalker has for a victim. The stalker may be totally obsessed with the vistim and may have deluded himself into believeing this is "love" when it is really total self absorbtion. So what I am saying I guess is that love must be something that is outer directed, and something onbe possesses for another regardless of whether or not it is requited.


Freedom is just another word for nothing left to lose....nah thats too easy. Freedom can only co-exist with restraint. In other words pure anarchy is not freedom.
The restraint is probably some framework of morality -- as simple as The Golden Rule. In other words so long as syou do unto others as they would do unto you (which includes dont lie cheat steal or be hurtful) then you can pretty do whatever you want to do.

Everything that has ever been created by a human mind or body can be considered art.

So Einstein's formulae are Art?

Certainly. As was the artful manner in which he conceived them, along with all the figures and problems he solved along the way to creating them.

Just the other day I saw e=mc2 on a t shirt.

Good point. Although, I don't know that Einstein created e=mc2, so much as he discovered or unlocked the equation. The underlying scientific principle exists whether or not it was found or comprehended by human minds.

Still, I agree with your point that the previous definition of art (anything created by mind or body) may be over-inclusive. I just urinated minutes ago, but I don't think I created art...then again

Einsteins formulaes represent things that simply are .

He discovered those things, and made them comprehensible for others via formulae.