I recently read this book on holiday in Austria.

Fascinating!

I am a Fine Art student attending Falmouth University Cornwall, going into my final year, and a devout follower of Jesus.
Throughout the course of my degree I have constantly struggled to reconcile my beliefs, with fine art.
Most of the time art seemed pretty pointless to me, it seemed completely self-indulgent, and a total waste of my time along with everybody else's - when considering the state of this world and the majority of it's inhabitants.

I am so glad to have found such a friend in Tolstoy.

I almost completely agree with everything covered in the book, and share his discontent with vague, vein, modern art. I, however, believe in people's freedom, to manufacture art regardless of it's "goodness", even still I wish that more and more creative people would be willing to endeavour to stand outside of Western individualism, pleasure, and art for arts sake; and begin to explore art that is oriented towards the progression and unification of mankind and our God; encompassing all realms of our salvation: physical, emotional, spiritual, political, economic, and social.

I am confident that I will not pursue a career in the arts (as we know it) after my degree, as I am keen to throw myself into the direct service of the poor; but rather I desire that art runs through my life and we will meet along the way when we may.

This kind of art excites me. This art that means so much more than beauty or pleasure. Why are we so afraid of it?

brillant and very challenging to what our conventional view of art is. Tolstoys main point is that the art that we see today (and in his time also) is on the whole very immitative and not true art. for him true is is when the artist feels something and wants to convey that through his work so that the person viewing it "feels" what the artist felt also. there are lots of other very challenging views in here which are very thought provoking. Some of my favourite bits:

"But among these works of various kinds of art there is one in a hundred thousand which is not simply a little better than the others, but differs from all the rest in the way a diamond differs from glass."


"In painting, such are all falsely religious and patriotic pictures, as well as pictures representing the amusements and delight s of exclusive, wealthy and idle living; and such are all so-called symbolic paintings, in which the very meaning of the symbol is accessible only to persons of a certain circle; and, chiefly, all paintings of sensual objects, all that outrageous female nudity which fills all exhibitions and galleries. To the same kind belongs almost all concert and operatic music of our time, beginning with Beethoven — Schumann, Berlioz, Liszt, Wagner — the content of which is accessible only to people who have cultivated in themselves a morbid nervous excitability aroused by this artificial and exceptionally complex music."

"People say it is terrible and pitiful to look at little acrobats putting their legs behind their necks, but it is no less pitiful to look at ten-year-old children giving concerts, and still more so to see ten-year-old children who know by heart the exceptions of Latin grammar . . . But it is not only that these people are crippled physically and mentally — they are also crippled morally, becoming incapable of anything that is really necessary for people."

"No situation is more harmful for artistic productivity than the situation of complete security and luxury in which artists usually live in our society.
The artist of the future will live the ordinary life of a human being, earning his living by some kind of labor. "

Tolstoy slides from saying good art engages our ideals to equating our ideals with his religion in contrast to beauty, pleasure, interest, skepticism.

به نظر میاد تولستوی با همه چی مخالفه کلا. چه می دونم. سعی می کردم منظقشو بپذیرم ولی کاملا مسخره می شد برام بعضی جاها.

Much better and more convincing than I was expecting. Even Tolstoy's literature review is entertaining. And yes, it gets a bit repetitive, and it's not perfectly thought through, but as a work of social and cultural criticism, this deserves (even) more praise than it receives.

i enjoyed the book a lot. will write a more detailed review later~

Tolstoy's work in aesthetics, What is Art? deals with two main issues: (1) Is there a moral justification for the lives, money, and resources spent in the artworld, and (2) What is the nature of art? Tolstoy claims that the nature of genuine art is to transfer feelings from the artist to others, thereby uniting the artist and audience; thus, art is a means of communion. And Tolstoy argues that there is no justification for most of what passes as art in the contemporary world. Most of it, he says, is for the sake of the rich, the idle, the elite. It is thus decadent "counterfeit art". It seeks to impress rather than to join ordinary people in their common good. Tolstoy infamously repudiates most of the art that has considered to be great throughout history (including his own War and Peace and Anna Karenina), and he calls for art that connects with ordinary people and which supports the religious conception of the age, which he takes to be the brotherhood of all people. Although What is Art? has many faults, it is much more valuable than many critics claim. I highly recommend it, for it stimulates one to think about the artworld in a new, helpful way.

Look at me rating Tolstoy on a website

-

I’ve never thought about art in this way; as a force to unite humanity while focusing on what is true and authentic expressions of self. Nevertheless, it is difficult to read what Tolstoy refers to as virtuous art when all examples are in French.

Что такое искусство? = Chto Takoye Iskusstvo? = What Is Art?, Leo Tolstoy

What is Art? is a book by Leo Tolstoy. It was completed in Russian in 1897 but first published in English due to difficulties with the Russian censors.

Tolstoy cites the time, effort, public funds, and public respect spent on art and artists as well as the imprecision of general opinions on art as reason for writing the book. In his words, n  "it is difficult to say what is meant by art, and especially what is good, useful art, art for the sake of which we might condone such sacrifices as are being offered at its shrine".n

تاریخ نخستین خوانش: روز بیست و دوم ماه ژوئن سال1976میلادی

عنوان: هنر چیست؟؛ نویسنده: لئو تولستوی؛ مترجم: کاوه دهگان؛ تهران، امیرکبیر، چاپ دوم سال1345، در278ص؛ چاپ سوم سال1350؛ چاپ چهارم سال1352؛ چاپ پنجم سال1355؛ چاپ ششم سال1356؛ چاپ هفتم سال1364؛ موضوع: در باره چیستی هنر از نویسندگان روسیه - سده19م

رومن رولان: تولستوی در این کتاب، همه ی بساط وامانده ی دنیای کهن را، به دور میریزد؛ پایان نقل

تولستوی هنر را، از هنر جعلی، جدا می‌کنند؛ هنر باید، یک ارتباط احساسی مشخص، بین هنرمند، و خوانشگر ایجاد کند: (طوری‌ که خوانشگر را، تحت تأثیر قرار دهد؛ بنابراین هنر واقعی، باید ظرفیت لازم، برای متحد کردن مردم، از طریق ارتباط را، داشته باشد)؛

ایشان باور داشتند، که درک هنر، شامل هرگونه فعالیت انسانی می‌شود؛ هنرمند، به وسیله ی نشانه‌ هایی که از خود بروز داده، و احساساتی را که، پیشتر آزموده، هنر خویش را، نمایش می‌دهد؛ «تولستوی»، برای این ادعا، مثالی می‌زنند: (پسرکی که احساس ترس را، پس از روبرو شدن با یک گرگ، تجربه کرده، از تجربه‌ ی خویش، برای تحت تأثیر قرار دادن دیگران، برای درک احساسی که او تجربه کرده‌، استفاده می‌کند؛ این مثال بسیار خوبی از کار هنر است؛ این هنر، به خاطر داشتن عنصر ارتباط، یک هنر خوب است، زیرا روشن، آشکار، و صادقانه‌ است، و حتی هنری فوق العاده‌ است، زیرا بر یک احساس -احساس ترس- متمرکز شده‌ است)؛

تاریخ بهنگام رسانی 23/11/1399هجری خورشیدی؛ 19/10/1400هجری خورشیدی؛ ا. شربیانی

نعم للفن الشعبي ، نعم للفن الذي يصل إلى كل الناس ، نعم للفن الذين يعديك بالأحاسيس ، ولا للفن المزيف .
هذه الشعارات خرجت بها من هذا الكتاب ، صحيح أنني في بعض الأحيان كنت لست مقتنعة ببعض آراء تولستوي ، ولكن هذا لا يمنع أنه كما نقول بالعامية "حط على الجرح ملح" ، في زمن جهلنا فيه ما هو الفن ؟ أجل نحن نعيش زمن تولستوي ، الطبقات الغنية واحتكارها للفن وأن ليس أحد غيرهم يستطيع فهم الفن ! من الأشياء التي استفزتني جداً في هذا الكتاب وأعتقد استفزت تولستوي بذاته لهذا كتب عنها وكررها في كل فصل من فصول الكتاب ، كيف لك أن تحتكر الفن لطبقة معينة ، وعندما نرى نرى أنه فن زائف خالي من الأحاسيس .
شدد تولستوي على غضبه من ما تسميه الطبقات الغنية بالفن ، وعبر في بعض الأحيان بسخرية من فنهم الزائف ، كان يصفعهم بكل كلمة يقولها .
خمسة عشر سنة من البحث ليخرج بهذا الكتاب ليكون على بينة من أن هذا الكتاب شامل لكل ما يدور في عقله ، ليكون صفعة للحمقى كما قال بعض الكتاب عنه . أعجبني أيضاً كيف تولستوي ربط الفن بالعلم في نهاية الكتاب كيف أن الفن الزائف والعلم الغير نافع لا يفيدان أحد إلا الفئة التي تريد العالم أن يكون على هواها .
وفي النهاية فليحيا الفن الحقيقي .