11 October 2009

in response to michelle's post "beauty" 10.10.09

my question is why do we feel the need to place a label on art? Why not just let art exist and whatever people deem as art let it then be called art and what certain people don't deem as art then let not be art?

I smiled when I read this because I've been thinking the same thing for a few weeks now. My thinking is that I don't have any artistic qualities, so who am I to tell someone that something does not qualify as art?

However, I think that one reason stems from a few classes back, human nature is to feel the need to qualify something and categorize it.
We categorize art (realism, impressionism, contemporary), forcing the theory that no one thing is original, that all art falls into some category.
We also need to feel as if art is special in some way. If every doodle was considered art, wouldn't that lessen its appeal?
Therefore, I believe, that's why we feel the need, or a natural pull, to qualify or disqualify certain things as art.

As of now, I believe that art needs to evoke some sort of emotion to qualify and connect humans to communicate in another form. However, later on in the course, that might change.

I don't think that there will ever be a set definition of art, I think it's an endless battle. However, that battle stimulates conversation and debate with academic minds, so isn't that a good thing?

No comments: