“The true test of the greatness of a work of art is its ability to be understood by the masses.”
The statement "The true test of the greatness of a work of art is its ability to be understood by the masses;" is highly problematic. Art in itself has an ambiguous definition that combines concepts of aesthetics and personal emotion.
When one thinks of art, it becomes clear that the definition of art is too abstract. Art can be anything from cavepaintings to heiroglypics and pottery. Does this mean that art as it is defined is too broad? If that is the case, the quote clearly asks for a narrow interpretation of artwork that makes the current questionable.
Firstly, what constitutes artwork and which medium should be accepted as the norm. When discussing a work of art, it is vital to understand the different forms in which art manifests itself. There are mediums such as clay, wood, canvas, marble, etc. If someone creates an abstract painting on a canvas and another artist creates the same piece, but three dimensional, does the essence of the artwork change or not? If so, does this change take away from the greatness of the piece? Da Vinci's sketching of man with many arms is an impressive work of art that many would call great. This label of greatness does not stem from the fact that when inspected, it is obviously a drawing of a man. Instead, the skecth offers an intriguing geometric perspective of man that catches the viewers eye. Now, if that same piece of art were to become a marble sculpture, would its level of greatness deteriorate because it could be seen as a perversion of the male figure? One would hope that by transferring this work of art from one medium to another, its ability to be understood would not undermine it...
... middle of paper ...
...r time to find pieces that the find great and that affect them in the way art was meant to.
Upon further inspection of the old adage, "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder?" one must assess if beauty contitutes a great work of art. If so, who determines what is beautiful. Art does not alwyas have to be about aesthtic beauty, it can be about something more-- a message that finds itself reverberated from the viewers mind. What one may constitue a great work of art, some may see as nothing more than glorified scribbling.
In conclusion, I must reiterate that the notion that the greatness of art is contingent upon its ability to be understood by the masses to be a complete fallacy. By utilizing and adhering to such a strict interpretation of "great art," society would lose out on masterpieces that challange the breadth of cultural ideals of beauty and art.
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,
Thousands of artists emerge from their mindless slumber to paint rosy cheeks and draw cat inspired winged eyes. These artists sketch over-plucked eyebrows and draw arches to a create strange self-described works of art, that they believe to be aesthetically pleasing. If these artists see a glimpse of imperfection, their masterpiece is ruined and their canvas has to be wiped clean. The artist is seeking the approval and acceptance from their well-known art critics, so this masterpiece has to be their finest work of art.
Art is a language of its own and with out he proper understanding, people are like expression goes “left on the outside looking in”. In other words, people without the proper understanding of art, technique and form as well as other elements can’t appreciate a work of art as much as when you understand why an artist painted in the way they did and what they are trying to get across to his audience. Despite artists attempts to try and make their works as viewer friendly as possible, without the understanding and knowledge gained from an art class as this one people will never fully understand the a work of art as it is meant to be.
In existential thought it is often questioned who decides what is right and what is wrong. Our everyday beliefs based on the assumption that not everything we are told may be true. This questioning has given light to the subjective perspective. This means that there is a lack of a singular view that is entirely devoid of predetermined values. These predetermined values are instilled upon society by various sources such as family to the media. On a societal level this has given rise to the philosophy of social hype. The idea of hype lies in society as the valuation of something purely off someone or some group of people valuing it. Hype has become one of the main driving forces behind what society considers to be good art and how successful artists can become while being the main component that leads to a wide spread belief, followed by its integration into subjective views. Its presence in the art world propagates trends, fads, and limits what we find to be good art. Our subjective outlook on art is powered by society’s feedback upon itself. The art world, high and low, is exploited by this social construction. Even when objective critique is the goal subjective remnants can still seep through and influence an opinion. Subjective thought in the art world has been self perpetuated through regulated museums, idolization of the author, and general social construction because of hype.
Though most works of art have some underlying, deeper meaning attached to them, our first impression of their significance comes through our initial visual interpretation. When we first view a painting or a statue or other piece of art, we notice first the visual details – its size, its medium, its color, and its condition, for example – before we begin to ponder its greater significance. Indeed, these visual clues are just as important as any other interpretation or meaning of a work, for they allow us to understand just what that deeper meaning is. The expression on a statue’s face tells us the emotion and message that the artist is trying to convey. Its color, too, can provide clues: darker or lighter colors can play a role in how we judge a piece of art. The type of lines used in a piece can send different messages. A sculpture, for example, may have been carved with hard, rough lines or it may have been carved with smoother, more flowing lines that portray a kind of gentleness.
“The aim of art is to represent not the outward appearance of things, but their inward significance,” –Aristotle
Just as other works that reflect art, pieces in the category of fine arts serve the important message of passing certain messages or portraying a special feeling towards a particular person, function or activity. At times due to the nature of a particular work, it can become so valuable that its viewers cannot place a price on it. It is not the nature or texture of an art that qualifies it, but the appreciation by those who look at it (Lewis & Lewis, 2008).
Of course, this argument cannot be held to all art. If that were the case, then a majority of artwork would be then considered worthless. Bell’s principle of aesthetic emotion is far too specific to define such a wide array of visual art. Not to mention, everyone’s interpretation of what
Art by definition is “the expression or application of creative skill and imagination, producing works to be appreciated primarily for their beauty or emotional power,” (Hacker, 2011).
...ns something when it imitates nature and delivers facts of history or culture. Art is the exploration of what it is to be alive, to be human and struggling to understand one’s role within society and identity in general. By stretching the limits of what is acceptable, the artist questions preconceived ideas of what is ugly and beautiful, important and unimportant. These ideas in art and society are influenced by the emergence of new technologies that expand human understanding. Since technology improves and human understanding is bolstered by these theories (both philosophical and scientific), then art will always have a place. The artist’s place is to criticize and express the tendencies and attitudes of himself and of society. Even if those feelings are marginalized, their expression makes the audience aware of them, and begs them to ask questions of themselves.
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.
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.
views as to what art is; and as they say, beauty is in the eye of the
Human’s have always struggled to express themselves. Art, is considered by many to be the ultimate form of human expression. Many assume that art has a definition, but this is not the case. Art, it can be said, is “in the eye of the beholder.” This simply means that what you consider art, someone else would not. Art is part of a person’s internal emotions, which signifies why different people see art as different things. Every type of culture and era presents distinctive and unique characteristics. Different cultures all have different views of what art can, and would be, causing art itself to be universally renowned throughout the world.