Have you often heard many people trying to leave the term 'art' away. Sometimes I had the impression they do try it convulsive. Often they just go to distinguish between nature and culture.
In times one must confess culture has been developed forward to be nature again, I think this art term or art as a historical unknown quantity is of importance also. The only definition that I would have was; art is nothing you can express beyond yourself. As soon as you doing something externally, whatever it is, you will need a tool. When you need a tool it is craft you're doing.
Therefore mankind on earth has to apprehend nature as what was first and culture second and than it's nature again (no other term will fit and the systematic known from nature is in computer systems again), culture must have been possible via art.
Thus, art has to be an alternation of processes as understood with the help of the different sciences into the human body. Not biology only. Since doctors measure electrical brain currents, physics at least is here a part of the theme. there probably changing between nature and culture in and in between these sciences.
This issue is one normally a bit to hard to be banned as text, but I thought I do anyway.
Steffen Schenk
Rhythm University
a