“They feel artistic value is not so intrinsic in the work as much as a function of when the stance of a certain artistic approach is introduced to the public. A brown painting exhibited today could appear to derive from an obsolete concern to everyone, but, if shown tomorrow, it could be called fresh and new”.
I think that this quote pulled from the Exhibiting section of the article is very true to how genres of art change today. When in the past (1800’s – 2000’s) art genres that were popular would be almost set in stone, especially in the older eras where art was at its peak evolution. For example in the 1850’s during the revolution against romanticism, realism was created and was extremely popular during this time. Whereas today, so many styles of art exist and we kind of draw from the old ways in my opinion. The ancient eras of art can be drawn from for inspiration, but today’s “genre” is such an amalgam of techniques and styles that constantly change with trends. One year acrylic pouring could be trending and the next impressionism or abstract painting.
Why do you think in today’s society this flurry of styles came to be, were these trends a byproduct of social media and the internet?
“There has been futile debate about whether photography, film, television, advertising, or industrial design are complete arts or not.”
This quote from the Fabrication section of the article is just a very good conversation point when it comes to the age-old question, “What is Art”? I ask myself and friends this question often because I am someone who does personally view photography as a form of art in some ways. Composition and rules of photography make it more difficult to do perfectly and to master in my opinion. Of course there is a huge grey area, and the reason this argument exists is rooted in history that dates back to the invention of the camera itself. In 1888, when the first camera was invented, realism painters now had to compete with a machine to capture reality. This sparked the first argument of many, and created this issue of whether a photo is “real art”. I personally view both hyper-realism and photography lower than most genres of art because I enjoy viewing an artist’s unique view or vision on a subject when painting, sculpting, etc. When copying reality what makes you different from a camera? Sure technique is there and it can be difficult and time consuming, but most pieces made this way lack flair in my opinion.
What is your personal opinion on this age-old argument, and how can you justify your opinion? Why or why not are these forms of media considered art in your opinion?
