Leave It Up To C&H and College To Start a Debate...
I suppose this originally started within my college class, History of Western Arts, expanded out when I found the perfect summation in a Calvin and Hobbes strip and was fueled by Nicole's post about the whole time-traveling thing. What can I say? It inspired me to actually post something.
The question is simple really, what is art? The answer ( Read more... )
I was in art class while at WCU. We were asked to look at various forms of visual art (not only paintings, but architecture, statues, etc...) and rate them based upon personal preference of aesthetic appeal.
I ended up figuring out that I overvalue proportion. Anything out of 'whack' or disproportianate jars me into giving it a lower grade.
Modern art sometimes appeals, but only if it is proportinate. The same goes for any realistic or impressionistic art. Architecture, surprisingly, I was the hardest on. Clean angles were a must. Frank Wright was my fav.
Others loved the art that wasn't my favs. Going on personal preference can't be the correct way to define art, then, because then it would be completely subjective to a select group and therefore not a collective reasoning that would have universal appeal.
Anyway, the thing I took from that experience is that art isn't something any one person can define. It is a fluid term, expanding and folding in on itself at times to adapt to the time frame in which the people create.
If someone calls it art, then who are we to tell him/her it isn't? That isn't to say it is good art. THAT quantifer is where the artists will always be at the whim of popular opinion. (Or in Avante Garde movements, the experts who dabble in critiquing those pieces.)
The artist is free to agree or disagree with how their art is classified, but in the end, they don't have a say in how the world views their art. It's all subjective.
Does that make any sense at all?
Reply
I'm completely with you on the fact that the term art adapts to the time and that we really have no right to tell someone that such and such isn't art. Here's where the "good art" and "bad art" comes into play. While I don't think that defining art should be based upon an opinion, deciding what's good or bad can be nothing but opinion.
It's always interesting to hear what people will say when challenged why they don't think such and such is art or why they don't like it. Obviously sometimes there is that initial reaction and there doesn't seem to be a reason, but there usually always is, whether we know it or not (like your overvaluing of proportion).
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment