Can a mqachine, a thing built only for purpose, be art?

[Vindekarr]

Machines are built to do a purpose, some of them have some thought given to form aswell as fuction, and some are very aesthetic, but can a machine, a device built solely to fulfil a purpose, a tool, be an object of art?

 

I say yes.

 

Any sort of discussion is fine, barring argumkents over about taste in art. Feel free to discuss what you think art is, but dont shout at eachother for having diferent ideas or I'll ask for this to be locked.

 

DISCUSS!!!

 

To start things off, a cute bit 'o history. This is the Heckler-Koch G-11 infantryman's rifle. Some of you will recognise it from COD BLOPS. It's one of the most elegantly designed weapons in human history AFAIK, it's a huge functional step forward on traditional firearms, with an astounding rate of fire, fantastic accuracy, a huge magazine, low weight, and little chance of jamming. But it never got used.

 

I think it's a work of art both because it's so beautifuly, thouhgtfully designed, and because it's got the X-Factor of being the ultimate assaul rifle of it's era but never having had the chance to prove it.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tm3CEXckXyQ http://i1228.photobucket.com/albums/ee454/Vindekarr/800px-G11_Schnittmodell.jpg

 

The genius part is the gas-powered rotory bolt. Normaly a gun needs to use it's recoil, or similar mechanism, to toss a spent shell casing free of the gun, then drag another bullet into the chamber in order to fire again. In the G-11, bullets drop verticaly into the rotating chamber, which aligns with the barrel and fires, spins around, grabs another bullet when it hit's verticle, drops level, fires, spins, fires, spins. The average military long-gun fires between 200-1000 bullets per second, the G-11 can do 2400.

 

It also doesnt need to expell empty cases because the boutique rounds it uses dont have a shell casing at all, it's a bullet wrapped in explosive, which means the whole mechanism can run more smoothely, cutting a whole wasteful cycle out of the gun's firing cycle. Though woe betide anyone who's G-11 jams, by all indication's they'd be a demon to try and un-jam in a firefight.

Edited February 20, 2011 by Vindekarr

[WastelandAssassin]

on the subject, i would say that yes, it may be so

 

in my opinion, any thing that is built by humans has a purpose

statues are usually built for giving a sense of beauty, and so are generally considered as art

however, any machine could potentially be seen as art, if the right people look at it in the right way

 

i remember that a few days ago, someone posted something related to the definition of art (from a dictionary)

in a nut shell, the definition of art is beauty taking shape, or beauty being expressed

 

if that is indeed the case, than anything that is considered beautiful can be considered as art

as an example, if you look at car shows, you will see many cars as art exhibits, and such cars can be quite beautiful

this is just an example of machines displayed as art, and i am sure there are many more such examples

[Aurielius]

http://i897.photobucket.com/albums/ac177/Aurielius/purdey.jpg

 

Some might disagree but this example of a Purdy shotgun certainly is art in my view.

[marharth]

In my opinion anything that has hard work put into it for the purpose of showing individuality in a non human thing is art.

 

I find it a bit sad people can only look at paintings music as art honestly.

[evilneko]

Darn it Aurielius I was gonna mention the tradition of making guns as art pieces. :tongue:

[AliasTheory]

How isn't it art? Art, to me, is anything that holds some sort of intrinsic value. It's a relative term. The appearance can hold aesthetic value or even historical value, and the manufacturing process can be an art as a craft. Yes, the machine is a piece of technology and helps to fulfill a certain purpose, but the process of getting there and how it addresses that problem is also certainly something to hold in high regard. And that I think you've explained well, Vindekarr.

 

Also: when it comes to tools, we definitely like our stuff to look pretty while we're using it. Haha.

Edited February 20, 2011 by AliasTheory

[Aurielius]

http://i897.photobucket.com/albums/ac177/Aurielius/3091859101_d1b2216df0.jpg

Though not my taste in fashion, it was considered art at the time.

[Vindekarr]

Here's another one I think is art.

 

The Italian super sports car manufacturor Lamborghini, last year ended production of one of it's most iconic vehicles, the Lamborghini Murcielago.

 

Most discontinued cars, even sports cars, slip into obscurity when production ends, but Lamborghini decided that rather than letting the car that built their current reputation slip into the pages of autmotive history quietly, they instead chose to send it out in a blaze of glory.

 

The result was the Murcielago LP670, the Murcielago SV for short. Clad in screaming hellfire orange paintwork, a gargantuan new aerodynamics package, and with it's engine made more powerful and fitted with a specialy designed, ultra-loud exhaust system, the SV was an unmissable, eye grabbing tribute to the car that helped re-launch the Lamborghini brandname.

 

Aswell as being visualy stunning, the SV version also gave collectors and journalists a fond memory of the now departed Murcielago-not only was it the fastest most powerful car Lamborghini had ever produced, it also has been described as the most heartstirringly enjoyable to drive.

 

It was also the end of another era for Lamborghini, for over a decade their vehicles had been powered by a standard issue 6.2 litre mid mnounted V-12, with the Murcielago leaving production, so did this classic engine.

The LP-640-V-12 engine also was given a spectacular swansong, tuned up to 670 horsepower, and visible from outside the car through it's Lexan engine cover, it's often quoted as being one of the best sounded car engines ever made, not to mention one of incredible power. Auto journalist Richards Hammond described the high-pitched, howling sound as "it's shouting at us, the engine is yelling "you'll miss me when I'm gone" "

 

http://i1228.photobucket.com/albums/ee454/Vindekarr/800px-APS_underwater_rifle_REMOV.jpg

[evertaile]

What about a machine with the sole purpose of looking good. Its mission is to be art, ergo it is - or not? Concept cars are machines that will never see the production line and never be functional outside of maybe one example, the prototype function to off the designers' creativity and production skill and ability. That is purpose built machine art in my view.

 

Link for machine art (purpose built artwork machinery):

 

http://artmachines.org/

 

Also, people do love pretty things. WE grow attachments to things that are shiny or have curvy patterns or contrasting colors etc. - in order to make someone want something, it HAS to look the part, it has to look good -- and people are creative, we just are. Anything manmade will always have a spin on it - mass production is what depletes that, but hints will always remain.

 

 

 

 

 

Edited February 21, 2011 by evertaile

[DariusMoranda]

http://thumb18.webshots.net/s/thumb3/7/63/12/140476312frrbXg_th.jpg

 

http://www.arthurwyatt.co.uk/images/photos/russia/moscow40.jpg

 

http://www.fobz.com/images/most-beautiful-cars11.jpg

 

http://bellespics.eu/image/52a83e90/

 

 

Of course they can. Whatever is made by a human hand, has a slight of art in it. Even if it is a deadly machine sometimes, it has some bizzare beauty.

 

Moranda