[Pu the Owl]

Life comes first, then art tries imitate it or in better cases to give an explanation of it (positive or negative explanation...nihilism can be art too). Art is somehow a sort of "religion" to the artist, in its higher forms, that's why art and life are so similar, apart from the mere imitation question. Beauty can or cannot be expressed thru art. Just think about the greatest part of the art of the XX century: Marcel Duchamp took a bicycle wheel and transformed it into artwork. An ugly, old, stupid bicycle wheel... nothing less, nothing more than this. The action of choosing an object among the others, also a vulgar tool, is indeed the evidence artists don't need to create beauty to create art. I agree with Gadzoox on most points of her posts. Several philosophers, including Immanuel Kant, pointed out that art is not a matter of taste, so what you're saying is basically untrue, because the fact of being "ugly", "badly placed" or whatever, doesn't imply that what you're talking about is not art. What you consider to be a terrible piece of crap could be art for someone else or could become the content of some artwork that you probably wouldn't appreciate at all. You mentioned breaking a leg as the ultimate form of anti-artistic product... J.G.Ballard wrote a whole book called "Crash" about the connection between car accidents and art....

Back to topic, I don't have many vinyls. I like to consider a vinyl as a fetish. They're beautiful stuff to touch and too look at, they're much more fascinating than Cds; plus, their sound is warm and and comforting. For common needs I have to say Cds, just because they're easier to find, they don't break as easily as vinyls, they can be listened to with portable players and so on. Technology improves your material conditions, not your life in general. Something has to be lost in the process.