3

Would a native speaker say "They are great parts of art", if I am talking about music and dance? And if I am talking about one thing, for example, photography can I say "It's a great part of art"? Is it grammatically correct and natural?

Perhaps I should use "an art form" and "art forms" instead? Do native speakers prefer "art forms" and "an art form" instead of "a form of art" and "forms of art"? For example, "It's a beautiful art form." Not "It's a beautiful form of art." Or "They are beautiful art forms." Instead of "They are beautiful forms of art."

8
  • 1
    “parts of art” is not something a native speaker would say. Depending on the intended message perhaps “forms of art” or “art forms” just “arts” might be better options.
    – jwpfox
    Nov 25 '20 at 9:24
  • 1
    I think the choices you are giving in your edit are equally fine and just a matter of taste or preference.
    – jwpfox
    Nov 25 '20 at 9:29
  • 2
    We sometimes say "great works of art" for individual pieces, and this can refer to music, literature, painting, sculpture etc. So you can say of a photograph "This is a (great) work of art." Aside: it does not have to be beautiful, but expressive. Nov 25 '20 at 9:31
  • 2
    Perhaps "art form" is a better generalisation. We don't say "parts of art". Nov 25 '20 at 9:35
  • 1
    form of art is by far the more likely way you will hear it. Much like you will hear "state of the art" and not "art state"
    – eps
    Nov 25 '20 at 17:57
6
  1. Photography is a fascinating art form.

  2. Photography is a fascinating form of art.

On the face of it, these mean the same thing.

I personally detect a slight difference. Sentence (1) assumes the reader already knows that photography is an art form. It merely tells us that it is a fascinating one. Sentence (2) informs us that photography is a form of art. It adds in passing that is fascinating.

Notice that this difference could be made explicit by emphasising certain words when reading or speaking the sentences, e.g.

Photography is a fascinating art form.

vs

Photography is a fascinating form of art.

Let's see if others agree with this distinction.

3
  • 4
    It's much the same distinction with artwork / work of art. So The Mona Lisa is a work of art sounds completely natural, but the "unqualified" form The Mona Lisa is an artwork seems more than a little "odd" (whereas the "qualified" form The Mona Lisa is a unique artwork is fine). Nov 25 '20 at 13:07
  • 1
    Art form just sounds like something a robot would say. This art form is nice to look at bbzzzzttt brrrrrrrrr
    – eps
    Nov 25 '20 at 17:59
  • 1
    I agree that both versions are fine and both have subtly different implications... to me, the difference is that "form of art" emphasizes that we're discussing a specific type of art, a particular subset of all forms of artistic expression. Unless verbal emphasis is used to the contrary, I'd interpret "art form" to refer generically to just any ol' form of art.
    – A C
    Nov 25 '20 at 20:06

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.