Like some of the comments before me, I think art is more of a mind-set than anything else. It is the intentionality, purpose, care, technique, or conscious lack thereof that an artist brings to an activity, performance or piece of artwork. Art is equally the attention, reaction, focus or interaction that a person experiencing the piece of art work has for it. Like the age old “if a tree falls in a forest and no one hears it, did it really make a sound?”, I wonder the same thing about art: is a piece of artwork such as a painting sitting in a human-less vacuum in and of its very self a piece of art? Or is it only in relationship to people that any object in space can become art? Is there some definable intrinsic quality called “art” that lives in any piece of artwork, making it “art” regardless of its context? I don’t think so. I think that is further evidenced by the different cultural definitions of what is art and the way in which each new art movement forces people to re examine what they think art consists of. Such as Kazimir Malevich’s 1918 “Suprematist Composition: White on White”.
No comments:
Post a Comment