Does art deceive us when it makes an assertion that it is reflecting reality acc

Question:I think that art definitely has the potential to decieve when blatant assertations are made when it comes to art. For an instructor to claim a piece created to be absolute art has the possibility to be deciving by reason of how and when we as a society form a definition in relation to this claim. To set a precipice to stand by, leaves deletion of any other art form that does not fall in that example, within those parameters, as not being art. What makes this definition, and all art forms that measure up to this definition, absolute and true? In a total sense, no, it is not a reflection of reality, even with the majority of a vote included, reality, as described by Plato, in the true sense, is what is already made in nature.
what do u think?

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker: I think that art definitely has the potential to decieve when blatant assertations are made when it comes to art. For an instructor to claim a piece created to be absolute art has the possibility to be deciving by reason of how and when we as a society form a definition in relation to this claim. To set a precipice to stand by, leaves deletion of any other art form that does not fall in that example, within those parameters, as not being art. What makes this definition, and all art forms that measure up to this definition, absolute and true? In a total sense, no, it is not a reflection of reality, even with the majority of a vote included, reality, as described by Plato, in the true sense, is what is already made in nature.
what do u think?

all is a deception
reality is an allusion
Einstein proved that objects curved time and space so each of us is in a slightly different time and space
perceptions can be deceiving --art is an allusion at best
when we look into the mirror and see a reflection do we see ourselves or a mask or a body--I think I am more than a body
I am a soul within a body and if the mirror reflects a mirror??

Ayn Rand gave the definitive description of art, calling it "the selective recreation of reality."
No one, no matter how hard he/she tries, can give an absolutely accurate description of reality, because if so much as a crumb on the table he paints is not metaphysically important to the "reality," he will leave out the crumbs.

This is where the "selection" comes in. Only a photograph can be that accurate.

So the question becomes, "Which reality?" There is epistemological reality, political reality, ethical reality (what if the art involves something ethical--will those table crumbs be important?).
No artist puts anything into his/her art that is not metaphysically important to the "reality" he/she is trying to "reflect."

Art doesn't have to reflect reality. It can contain reflections of it. Art can be a statement: political, emotional, or otherwise. Art is very broad and very fluid and very much alive.