When determining what is art, would the views of the creator or the viewer be more important?
I liked this question a lot, Kim, and I think one could go so many places with it. However, I am going to give my opinion as an answer.
First, I believe that it is certainly the intent of the creator that makes something art. It is not the audience's position to determine if one thing is art and another is not. The biggest example I can think of is why on earth do we put ancient pots and other such artifacts into art museums!? These were not created with the intent of being art, but simply with utilitarian usage; it doesn't matter if they were painted all pretty and such, they were not meant to be displayed as works of art. I understand why they would be put into history museums, but not art.
It would be like putting one of the tables from the townhouse living rooms in a museum...why!? They are just there to be used, not displayed. Or even better, it would be like displaying a display case...what the heck is the point of that?
Anyways, sorry for the little rant. Basically, it goes back to the discussion we were having in class, just because something is beautiful, doesn't mean it's art.
No comments:
Post a Comment