Quote:
Originally Posted by Superman
...Art's value is in how it makes you FEEL when you view it."
|
That's a "romantic" perspective (and not necessarily what determines worth). Another is, what does it make you THINK or wonder. The two are not necessarily mutually exclusive if one does not choose to make them so.
People with no more of an interest in art other than as something to hang on their wall that pleases their eye (which is to say, most people) don't consider that "fine" art is not about decoration, or illustration, or function - indeed, "beauty" and decorativeness can be found totally lacking in many great works of art; Picasso's Guernica, for example.
Writers make statements using words, musicians use sounds and "fine" artists make visual marks to make their statements. As with serious writers, poets and musicians, fine artist's statements are not driven by what the public wants to read, listen to or look at, but rather by what drives them personally.
One can choose to dismiss what one doesn't find visually appealing or doesn't fit their personal definition of what "art' is. Or one can be interested in what reasons an artist has for expressing themself as they have, ie, what the art is "about". Therein lies a wealth of history and ongoing activity in the realm of art, a realm which has always generated scholarly examination, criticism and polemics.
That "modern" art gives rise to such emotionalism (sometimes seemingly verging on hatred) and derogatory remarks is amusing. To wonder and to ask questions is one thing; to dismiss what doesn't fit one's personal preferences in "pleasing decoration" as garbage, fraud or trash is just ignorance.