Wednesday, September 2, 2009












Another question to ponder, "Is it possible to assess and evaluate art? If so, what is good art, and conversely, how can one determine what is bad art?"... as posed by Peter, Professor extraordinare.
Art is subjective, based entirely on opinion. It used to be, it seems, that art was "good" if it best represented the real thing. The ancient greeks strove to understand and capture the perfection of man, for example. The better the likeness, the better the ability of the artist. But when photography came on the scene, art, for the sake of recording a person or event changed. What was the point of painting something good that you could photograph perfectly. So art became more about interpretation; accurate representation was no longer vital. I am, of course, speaking in huge generalities. Not all of history followed this pattern, there have always been artists that have taken independent paths. But generally speaking, at the turn of the twentieth century, modern art became more about what was understood, interpreted and experienced in a piece of art; enjoying it wasn't even a prerequisite of fine art. This time period in art's history was controversial to say the least. Some may question how can Jackson Pollock's paint drizzles be compared to the works of Rembrandt. And furthermore, what makes Brillo Boxes a work of art just because Andy Warhol says it is. The way art had been traditionally understood was being challenged and redefined. As cliche as it may seem, beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. As I said at the beginning, art is subjective. Whether it is a cultural difference or merely just an individual taste, different people like different things. Therefore, I don't believe one can classify any art as bad. As I have studied works of art throughout history, my standard for what kind of art I appreciate has changed drastically. I have tried to understand the artist and the context that the work has been created in. As I understand more, I appreciate more. Perhaps this is a principle that translates to all areas of life. Just a thought!


2 comments:

  1. Since Art is not only seen from a personal perspective but also cultural putting a tag of it's “good or bad” as a form (Cubism vs. Realism vs. Expressionism)is closed minded. However what you can criticize within a genre is technique. Was the final outcome done so you understand that there was intent from start to finish, That is what makes A Kandinsky just as riveting as Picasso or Chagall.

    ReplyDelete
  2. http://link.brightcove.com/services/player/bcpid1321306269?bctid=31126757001 Rupert Spira does a nice video on art.

    ReplyDelete