What is art? How can "The Singing Butler" and "Close Up Water Splatter" be so vastly contrasting and yet both be considered art? Art is difficult to define, as the artists themselves are constantly working outside definitions and stretching the rules. However, art is generally assumed to have a purpose and depict an emotion.When does talent matter? A child could conceivably create a painting similar to Teague's, but could not create a Vettriano painting. Despite the differences in 'artistic' talent, both evoke emotion.
Both are beautiful.
Art is beautiful, whether it could only have been created by a trained professional, or is simply a collage of colors that almost anyone could recreate. The emotional intent of the artist can either be blatant or subtle. The viewer is responsible for interpreting the art and determining the feeling. Art, as beauty, is often in the eye of the beholder.
While I will agree with you that art is defined as "That which has a purpose and depicting an emotion," I would have to ask you a question: How far is too far? For example, a bug evokes the emotion of disgust (for me, for others the emotion may be different), and has a purpose (to eat and reproduce), but the bug is clearly not art. While I agree with your definition, I would have to ask you to clarify. Also, keep up the good work!
ReplyDelete-- Jeremy
I definitely agree that a bug often does often make me feel squeamish, and I have no desire to take a closer look at that bug. If you did look more closely, you would see detail, precision, and beauty. Some consider it art. Have you ever heard of microphotography? It's basically the photography of a magnified item (often a plant). It's very weird, but very beautiful, and definitely art.
ReplyDeleteI couldn't tell you exactly "how far is too far." Even though I've given art a 'definition' it's not always constant for everyone everywhere. When do nude paintings cease to become art and become pornographic? Art means something different to everyone.