On the tip of my tongue....

I hate when you know what something is, but you just can't seem to find the words to describe what you want to say. It's like the words are on the tip of your tongue, but you can make sense of them. This lack of articulation is one of many theories on why art is indefinable. Weitz doesn't try to define art, like many other philosophers do, because he states that art is too broad a subject for us to put into words without excluding something. "There is an exception to every rule," My french teacher used to say. I believe this rings true when we try to define art. There are always exceptions, things that we consider art that don't quite fit into the general categories we give them. We can break down types of art into categories and subcategories, which we can then define, but wa can't seem to find a deffinition for art as a whole. Art is this ever moving, ever growing, ever changing form of expression that will continue to flow in a circling spiral. We can't define something, unless we constantly adapt our definiton of it. My question then becomes, if art had evloved, and humans have evolved, was there ever a point where art was a simple form, perhaps in the early years of mankind, when art was used solely for religous purposes, that we could have defined art, before it began to evolve?