Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
What is your definition of art
What is your definition of art
What is your definition of art
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: What is your definition of art
The definition of art has always been a wondering question throughout the centuries. Even our discussions in class lead back to the meaning of art and the individual viewer. The author Cynthia Freeland in But Is It Art? reviews and examines the diversity of both art theory and art. Most of the theories she examined from the different eras and cultures fell short. None of the theories were successful in defining the definition of art. Cynthia states, “Art enhances our awareness of both ourselves and our world. Unlike scientific theories, a theory of art does not predict what artists are going to do next. Art theory as I have described in this book is still an explanatory enterprise. Art is something special (Freeland 208). Cynthia Freeland realizes she cannot categorize art, but believes that art will always be diverse! Cynthia starts the introduction by explaining a theory is not only a definition. She writes, “A theory should help things make sense rather than create obscurity through weighty words. It should systematically unify and organize a set of observations, building from basic principles” (Freeland xvii). The problem though is that art is so varied that it seems overwhelming to try to combine and explain art, especially modern art. Modern art challenges us to figure out why and how it could count as art through the different theories. Cynthia brings to attention the diversity of art. She also explains why it is too difficult to categorize art through each theory. A theory is expected to decide whether or not something is art. If one theory states that art cannot have certain qualities or must have certain qualities and we still consider it to be art, than the theory is rejected. Each of these theori... ... middle of paper ... ...els and appreciates something different. This is why there is no correct way to interpret art. The only true fact from both these theories is that art communicates different things to diverse people. This in detail is wonderful. I believe Cynthia Freeland wrote this book creatively and accurately. People from around the world with different cultural and ethnic backgrounds appreciate, value, and passionately pursue the creation and assortments of art (Freeland 208). There will never be a ‘correct’ way in defining art. Art will continue to branch further through new media. Artists will continue to expand awareness and explore or find new ways to either shock us or entrance us with beauty in both sight and sound (Freeland 209). REFERENCE • Freeland, Cynthia A. But is it art?: an introduction to art theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001. Print.
My goal for this paper is to give a practical critique and defense of what I have learned in my time as a Studio Art Major. During my time here I have learned that Pensacola Christian college’s definition of art “art is the organized visual expression of ideas or feelings” and the four parts of Biblosophy: cannon, communication, client, and creativity. Along with Biblosophy I have studied Dr. Frances Schaeffer 's criteria for art, seeing how the technical, and the major and minor messages in artwork. All of these principles are great but they do need to be refined.
People can have many different opinions depending on a topic, but what is truly difficult is getting a complete level of understanding from every opinion, or understanding the point of view of each opinion. Even accepting the points of view can be difficult for some people, who believe that their opinions are right. Luckily, people can learn about the other person’s frame of reference, and at the very least understand the topic or the person a little better. This particular topic is art, which is known for its multiple possible perceptions or its many different messages that it can send a person or group of people. In this way, people can learn more about the thought processes and feelings of others. Unfortunately, with differing opinions,
ABSTRACT: British Avant-Garde art, poses a challenge to traditional aesthetic analysis. This paper will argue that such art is best understood in terms of Wittgenstein¡¦s concept of "seeing-as," and will point out that the artists often use this concept in describing their work. This is significant in that if we are to understand art in terms of cultural practice, then we must actually look at the practice. We will discuss initiatives such as the work of Damien Hirst, most famous for his animals in formaldehyde series, and that of Simon Patterson, who warps diagrams, e.g., replacing the names of stops on London Underground maps with those of philosophers. Cornelia Parker¡¦s idea that visual appeal is not the most important thing, but rather that the questions that are set up in an attempt to create an "almost invisible" art are what are central, will also be discussed. Also, if we concur with Danto¡¦s claims that "contemporary art no longer allows itself to be represented by master narratives," that Nothing is ruled out.", then it is indeed fruitful to understand art in terms of seeing-as. For application of this concept to art explains what occurs conceptually when the viewer shifts from identifying a work, as an art object, and then as not an art object, and explains why nothing is ruled out.
Harrison, Charles., Wood, Paul., and Gaiger, Jason. Art in Theory 18-15-1900: An Anthology of Changing Ideas. Malden, Massachusetts: Blackwell. 1998.
Danto’s theory of artistic identification requires only that the sentence “x is P,” where x is a given work and P a predicate functioning as an interpretation of that work, apply to a member of what he calls the ‘Artworld.’ He calls the word ‘is’ between x and the P in the sentence the ‘“is” of artistic interpretation,’ and any work indicated by this ‘is’ is art. For instance, we may say “the Eroica Symphony is profound.” By Danto’s definition, the fact that this artistic interpretation of the work is possible is sufficient to show that it is a work of art. Danto also posits a style matrix consisting of all the variant combinations of art-relevant predicates in today’s Artworld. This matrix serves as a context in which all artworks can be discussed, and is open to the addition of predicates as artists make innovative breakthroughs.
To explain it in a less broad and lofty manner, aesthetics asks questions along the lines of “what is art?”, “...
In conclusion, it is important that art continues to be gauged on its effort and ingenuity in order to be considered art at all. Otherwise, our cultural tendons will weaken and give way to the unmistakable infiltration of nonsense and effortless trash. We should be accepting of all art as long as there is some semblance of effort or ingenuity.
Among the many theories of art that have emerged over time, the theory I will defend in this paper is the Neo-Wittgensteinian theory of Art. I will defend this view against the following (two) objections: a) The “open concept” idea of art is too expansive, and b) the “family resemblance” theory of artworks is also too expansive.
Neither Formalism nor Neo-Formalism is the defining answer to the questions raised in the nature of art. As before, we are left to wonder, what theories will be created and indeed shot down by the philosophy community in relation to the nature of art next?
Stone, W. F. (1897). Questions on the philosophy of art;. London: Printed by William Clowes and Sons.
AA theory by Clive Bell suggests the pinpoints the exact characteristic which makes a work true art. According to Bell, an artwork must produce “aesthetic emotion” (365). This aesthetic emotion is drawn from the form and formality of an artwork rather than whether or not it is aesthetically pleasing or how well it imitates what it is trying to depict. The relation of objects to each other, the colors used, and the qualities of the lines are seemingly more important than what emotion or idea the artwork is trying to provoke. Regardless of whether or not the artwork is a true imitation of certain emotions, ideals, or images, it cannot be true art unless it conjures this aesthetic emotion related to formality (367).
For over two thousand years, various philosophers have questioned the influence of art in our society. They have used abstract reasoning, human emotions, and logic to go beyond this world in the search for answers about arts' existence. For philosophers, art was not viewed for its own beauty, but rather for the question of how art and artists can help make our society more stable for the next generation. Plato, a Greek philosopher who lived during 420-348 B.C. in Athens, and Aristotle, Plato’s student who argued against his beliefs, have no exceptions to the steps they had to take in order to understand the purpose of art and artists. Though these two philosophers made marvelous discoveries about the existence of art, artists, and aesthetic experience, Plato has made his works more controversial than Aristotle.
Aesthetics is the theoretical study of the arts and related types of behavior and experience. It is traditionally regarded as a branch of philosophy, concerned with the understanding of beauty and its manifestations in art and nature. However, in the latter 20th century there developed a tendency to treat it as an independent science, concerned with investigating the phenomena of art and its place in human life. Yet, what in a field with a hazy line in between being classified as a science or study of beliefs is considered data for determining what can be studied? It can simply be drawn to the only three things involved in the process of art : The creator, the person experiencing, and the art itself.
The. Theories of Contemporary Art. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall, 1985. Kotz, Mary Lynn. Rauschenberg/Art and Life. New York:
Art can be defined in many ways by an individual. One can say that any creative output by a person is considered art. Others contend that art must conform to a societal standard and the basis of the creation should be understood by most intellectual people. For example, some contend that computer-generated images, such as fractals, are not art due to the large role played by a computer. E.O. Wilson states “the exclusive role of the arts is to intensify aesthetic and emotional response. Works of art communicate feeling directly from mind to mind, with no intent to explain why the impact occurs” (218). A simple definition may be that art is the physical expression of the ideals formed by the mind.