Agree or disagree: Art does not need to have a purpose

[Taverner]

Whaddya say?

I agree...and I don't

4 votes, 0 passes | Time left: Unlimited
	Agree
	4 (100%)
	Disagree
	0 (0%)
	Beagle
	0 (0%)
	0 DU members did not wish to select any of the options provided.
Show usernames Disclaimer: This is an Internet poll

[olddots]

1. definately BEAGLE

but you have to have your beagle with lox & cream cheese

[pinboy3niner]

2. The purpose of art is to have Friday Afternoon Challenges :) nt

[cyberswede]

3. Art can be it's own purpose...so I'm not sure how to vote!

[rrneck]

4. Art doesn't offer answers

it gives you somewhere to go. That is it's purpose.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

5. Art is the purpose and the function. Everything is art and art is everything.

[petronius]

6. I think art by definition always has a purpose

Even if that purpose is to cover up the hole that your ex-roommate punched in the living room wall. Heck, even a doodle during a long boring meeting has the purpose of creating a little private moment of artistic expression.

So maybe the question is: is it possible for art to not have a purpose?

[CTyankee]

8. I agree with you entirely, Petronius! And you said it very well, IMHO.

[hunter]

7. Everything is art.

There is no purpose.

[Orrex]

9. Maybe not, but it *DOES* need to have a dolphin

Otherwise it ain't art.

[nolabear]

10. Art intrinsically does have a purpose.

It IS a purpose.