Where Art Thou?
Recently I watched the Sunday morning news program, aptly titled, Sunday Morning. They did a segment on the ever elusive question, What Is Art? that I found interesting.
Basically they questioned how one could call one painting an artistic masterpiece and another complete and utter junk, fit to be sold at a garage sale. In order to do this they had say, five works for five "artistic experts" to fawn over. Once they had examined each piece, they were to determine which were decidedly of value and which were not.
While this ain't no Pepsi Challenge, the results were still intriguing. Because sprinkled amongst the "classic" works of art were seemingly haphazard drawings done by kindergarten children. Although I admittedly can take or leave a good painting, what I love about this study is that the experts were, in a sense, punked. All they needed was Ashton Kutcher enthusiastically bouncing out from behind the Mona Lisa and they would have been good to go.
As I'm sure you can predict, the so-called experts dubbed the kindergarten art as the examples of talent, identifying key elements they look for which I simply cannot elaborate on here because I had no idea what they were talking about. Ironically, apparently neither did they. When the show revealed that the works of art were more likely created at a Gymboree than in some reclusive artist's studio, the experts stammered and stuttered. One even went as far as to say that perhaps this was just the work of a great artist in the making. Yeah, nice save.
They tried to explain their determinations away but they couldn't. Just think, all those years taking Art History and Art Appreciation classes only to have the wool pulled over your eyes by a 5 year old. I know I'd feel like a pretentious, misguided ass, but maybe that's just me. All the talk about certain lines and shading and whatever else really amounted to a hill of beans. Because if the child artist just happened to master these "skills" either that means they aren't hard to master at all or that art, is what most have been saying all along, completely objective.
For instance, some people love to wander the halls of museums, pouring over classics done by Picasso and Monet while others are completely happy with a happy green tree created by Bob Ross. Or what about the avant garde work of revered artist, Andy Warhol? He took a Campbell's Soup can, changed the colors and the world dubbed him an artistic genius. Meanwhile there is some guy out there who created the original Campbell's soup design that nobody knows the name of. Is one artist really more worthy than another? More importantly, does anyone YOU KNOW really care?
Most people don't need expensive art to be shipped over from foreign countries to prove they are cultured, and those that do usually have far too much time AND money on their hands anyhow. This is not to completely discount the works of great artists of yesteryear. All I am trying to do is reitorate the fact that art, like beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I believe the same theory holds true for all artistic expressions: music, theater, film, etc.
In the end, it all comes down to personal taste. For many, your daughter or son's work, hung proudly on the refrigerator by a magnet saying "I Love Mommy" is the best masterpiece of all. And that, as Stuart Smalley once said, "is ok".
Basically they questioned how one could call one painting an artistic masterpiece and another complete and utter junk, fit to be sold at a garage sale. In order to do this they had say, five works for five "artistic experts" to fawn over. Once they had examined each piece, they were to determine which were decidedly of value and which were not.
While this ain't no Pepsi Challenge, the results were still intriguing. Because sprinkled amongst the "classic" works of art were seemingly haphazard drawings done by kindergarten children. Although I admittedly can take or leave a good painting, what I love about this study is that the experts were, in a sense, punked. All they needed was Ashton Kutcher enthusiastically bouncing out from behind the Mona Lisa and they would have been good to go.
As I'm sure you can predict, the so-called experts dubbed the kindergarten art as the examples of talent, identifying key elements they look for which I simply cannot elaborate on here because I had no idea what they were talking about. Ironically, apparently neither did they. When the show revealed that the works of art were more likely created at a Gymboree than in some reclusive artist's studio, the experts stammered and stuttered. One even went as far as to say that perhaps this was just the work of a great artist in the making. Yeah, nice save.
They tried to explain their determinations away but they couldn't. Just think, all those years taking Art History and Art Appreciation classes only to have the wool pulled over your eyes by a 5 year old. I know I'd feel like a pretentious, misguided ass, but maybe that's just me. All the talk about certain lines and shading and whatever else really amounted to a hill of beans. Because if the child artist just happened to master these "skills" either that means they aren't hard to master at all or that art, is what most have been saying all along, completely objective.
For instance, some people love to wander the halls of museums, pouring over classics done by Picasso and Monet while others are completely happy with a happy green tree created by Bob Ross. Or what about the avant garde work of revered artist, Andy Warhol? He took a Campbell's Soup can, changed the colors and the world dubbed him an artistic genius. Meanwhile there is some guy out there who created the original Campbell's soup design that nobody knows the name of. Is one artist really more worthy than another? More importantly, does anyone YOU KNOW really care?
Most people don't need expensive art to be shipped over from foreign countries to prove they are cultured, and those that do usually have far too much time AND money on their hands anyhow. This is not to completely discount the works of great artists of yesteryear. All I am trying to do is reitorate the fact that art, like beauty is in the eye of the beholder. I believe the same theory holds true for all artistic expressions: music, theater, film, etc.
In the end, it all comes down to personal taste. For many, your daughter or son's work, hung proudly on the refrigerator by a magnet saying "I Love Mommy" is the best masterpiece of all. And that, as Stuart Smalley once said, "is ok".
<< Home