Art vs. Entertainment: What’s the Difference?


Despite the fact that I don’t have an objective viewpoint (no one does), and that my opinion is only one, I believe there is such a thing as good and bad art.

Perhaps labelling art as “excellent” or “poor” is too much to ask, or perhaps it feels too limited. That’s alright, I think; I don’t want to push my creative standards on others, and I wouldn’t want it the other way around either. But it’s not acceptable to refer to something as “art” when it isn’t — when it is, in fact, something else.

Entertainment vs. art

If this is the case, we may have a problem, because what many people refer to as “art” isn’t altering us. At most, it entertains us by dulling our senses and distorting our perceptions of reality. But it isn’t the point.

Art is supposed to change things:

  • It catches you off guard.
    It hurts.
    It shifts.

We enjoy ourselves when we are entertained. It doesn’t surprise us; it’s exactly what we expected. That is why we enjoy entertainment: it pampers us.

However, the problem with entertainment is that it does not transform us. And, whether we realise it or not, we are in desperate need of change.

Art, on the other hand, has the ability to transform us. How? It hurts us — it crushes our hearts, makes us cry, and exposes our own flaws.

We are forced to make a decision by art. It alters us by doing exactly what we don’t expect it to accomplish. So, dear artist, the question is:

Are you producing work that is predictable, doesn’t surprise, doesn’t wound, and doesn’t change anything?

So, what exactly are you making? It’s possible that it’s propaganda. It could be a commercial. It could even be amusement. However, it is unlikely to be considered art.

My entire life has been spent as an artist. It doesn’t matter if you’re a composer, musician, singer, designer, painter, or dancer. God designed me in such a way that ideas and creativity flow freely through my veins like water through a faucet. “The expression or application of human creative skill and imagination,” I define art as. Typically, it takes the shape of a visual medium such as painting or sculpture, resulting in works that are valued largely for their aesthetic value or emotional power. However, entertainment refers to the act of delivering or receiving pleasure or enjoyment. Many performers, such as oriental dancers, claim to be dance artists, yet their creative skill and imagination are undetectable in their performances. Art is what brings beauty into being, and beauty is what pleases without evoking desire. However, there is no tangible reason why one thing pleases one man but not another. Scientists are unable to decipher the laws of art, and the average person has difficulty distinguishing between the two.

Every work of art causes the recipient to form a bond with the artist, and some people spend a lot of time attempting to figure out exactly what the artist is trying to communicate. If this work appears impossible, the receiver develops a narcissistic characteristic and generates an opinion based on his or her personal life. Art transmits feelings in the same way that words do. Art elicits a feeling that one has previously had and then transmits that feeling to others through the use of shapes, colours, sounds, and motions. Art is not necessarily pleasing to the eye of the beholder, but it is a means of bringing people together in a shared emotion. A sculptor might put four pieces of metal together and call it a marvellous masterpiece and a work of art. Another person may perceive it as a piece of trash that will only be appreciated at a junk yard. As a result, I’ve come to the conclusion that art, in my opinion, comprises a personal style signature, and whether people find that signature insulting or beautiful remains to be seen. If, on the other hand, art is offensive and it captures people’s attention and keeps them wanting more, then offensive can become entertaining and humorous.