Art vs Nature
Art is basically creation by human beings though there are natural creations that are no less than best pieces of visual art. Art has been defined as “the use of skill and imagination in the creation of aesthetic objects, environments, or experiences that can be shared with others” – (Britannica Online). If one goes by this definition, art has existed since time immemorial. It has been there in the form of wall paintings, frescos, body piercing, tattoos, statues, paintings etc. Art is the imagination in the mind of the artist that he transforms into a tangible form through his skills. An artist gets inspired mostly by nature though there are times when the genius of the artist draws on his own. For a long time now there has been a heated debate going on to find out differences between art and nature. Let us join this debate.
Have you seen how people get attracted to any food item that is promoted as being natural? The term organic is now ubiquitous and is being used as a marketing term to attract more and more customers. If this is what happens with food and clothing, one can easily assume the attraction for nature and things natural for someone who is artistic by nature. Nature has always been kind enough to inspire hordes of artists, and the impact of nature and natural objects has been more than evident on art works of artists down the civilization.
What is the difference between Art and Nature?
As for differences between art and nature, it is well known that nature is original and art is only a creation by human beings. Art tries to replicate things natural but nature will always remain supreme. There is another difference between art and nature and it is the manner in which much deeper meaning is conveyed by an artist on his canvas though he appears to mimic nature. Howsoever beautiful the creation by humans may be, art can never be better or more beautiful than nature itself.