I don't know what isn't art, but I know it when I see it.

We were all shocked by the sudden death of Heath Ledger one year ago, and we all pray that his soul rests in peace.

The role of the "Joker" he played in the Batman movie has been universally praised as a masterpiece of the art of film.

Now, hang on a minute!!!!

Batman, and the villian called the Joker are comic book characters invented to appeal to young children. They have recently been turned into violent and sadistic movie characters, apparently intended to appeal to adolescent boys. In what way is that art? Apart from the obvious and simply evil violence in the movie, it is claimed that Batman and the Joker are complex characters because they recognise their opposite in each other and in some way need each other. That sounds evil, scary and a little bit psychological and is said to constitute art. But what is art?

Leo  Tolstoy was an eccentric thinker, but he turned his mind to this subject in an essay called "What is Art?"

If you like, you can read an excerpt and outline of this essay on the web. In the opinion of Tolstoy, the social elite class has decided what is art, regardless of its moral function, and whether it satisfies the function of real art.

On the other hand, his criteria for real art include:

• It is a means of communication. "To evoke in oneself a feeling one has once experienced, and having evoked it in oneself, then, by means of movements, lines, colors, sounds, or forms expressed in words, so to transmit that feeling that others may experience the same feeling -- this is the activity of art.
       Art is a human activity consisting in this, that one man consciously, by means of certain external signs, hands on to others feelings he has lived through, and that other people are infected by these feelings and also experience them."
• Good art always pleases everyone. It employs pictures, sounds, or formal design understood by "everyone" or, in the case of prose and poetry, is comprehended by any language speaker of a language into which it's translated. Corollary: It is accessible without the aid of interpretation by art critics
• Good art unites us. Tolstoy describes two kinds of feelings that unite men, those imparted by religious art and universal art. Religious art does not express the doctrines of any organized religion or "cult." It expresses "an understanding of the meaning of life which represents the highest level to which men of that society have attained". In our time, this feeling is connected to message of "love of God and of one’s neighbor."

Universal art expresses simple and accessible positive feeling. Found in all arts, but "most of all" in music.

Now, does the comic book character the Joker satisfy Tolstoy's criteria for art? Is it communicating a feeling experienced by the actors? I certainly hope not. Does it please everyone? I can't really say, but it doesn't please me, for one. Does it unite us and express positive feelings? Certainly not.

As I said in the heading, I find it hard to define exactly what isn't art, but I think movies about evil comic book characters are not art.