Quoting Brick Tales
Hi all,

I just ran across this group and am very interested in its potential. Back last summer, Roy Cook posted an essay on the Brothers Brick entitled "Flawed visions in defining LEGO as art":
http://www.brothers-brick.com/2008/08/06/flawed-visions-in-defining-lego-as-art-editorial/
I was intrigued by the conversation there and fleshed out the suggestion of a LEGO Art forum:
http://vignettebricks.blogspot.com/2008/08/lego-art-potential-forum-idea.html
But due to my prior LEGO commitments (admin at CC, blogs of my own) couldn't take it any further. So in lieu of that I look forward to fostering some conversation here.

So, to start it off, what about the basic question - is LEGO art? In the essay linked above, Roy writes that to be considered as such, the MOC needs three things:
* Form: (the creation has to display some minimum of building skill)
* Content: (the creation has to express a message, emotion, etc.)
* Context: (the creation has to be situated in a larger historical or traditional context)

Personally I think that anything that tries to be art is. To take painting, for instance, both a child's fingerpainting and something by Monet or Van Gogh etc. would pass this threshold. The question (IMO) is what constitutes great art. So too with LEGO.

Anyway, I was interested in others' views. What is the definition of art, particularly in relation to LEGO building? Does the definition lie in the creator, the observer or somehow inherently in the work itself?

Bruce