– – –
“Man-made collection of materials, tools and techniques for relaying information, which is, as a whole, unique from other information media.”
A man-made object which isn’t designed to convey information, like a chair, isn’t an example of information media. It exists to be sat on. If one can derive information from it, outside of that function, they just have a vivid imagination.
Each medium has its own set of possibilities which, while individually might be shared between other media, together form a unique whole. For instance, audio-visuals are shared between many mediums.
(From now on referred to simply as “medium” and “media”)
– – –
“A medium designed to convey meaningful and compelling information by its authors.”
A piece of media with only a function, like a map or a diner menu, isn’t artistic media. It exists to inform and nothing more. If one can derive meaningful and compelling information from it outside of that function, they just have a vivid imagination.
– – –
“Medium designed to convey meaningful and compelling information by its authors, which conveys meaningful and compelling information to the user.”
This definition is composed of two parts.
1.) Whether something is artistic media, i.e can be art (the objective part).
“Medium designed to convey meaningful and compelling information by its authors.”
The author of the piece is in total control of this bit, so there is no reason to disagree with what they claim.
2.) And whether something is art (the subjective part).
“Medium which conveys meaningful and compelling information to the user.”
The author has injected their own kind of meaningful and compelling information into the work, but whether it affects all users in the same way is completely up to the user. As such, art at best is a consensus among people. If many agree a certain artistic work is art, then in general terms it is. Individuals can disagree of course.
To sum up: What one finds meaningful might not mean a thing to another.