Discussions
What Makes Art Interesting?
Posted by bwhitaker • 10/02/09 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: art
Recently, I posted an entry to my blog where I argue (briefly) that the thing that makes art interesting is the element of surprise. Somehow if the artist incorporates into his/her work some aspect that is intended to disassociate the viewer from his/her expectations, then the work encourages the viewer to think, question, and examine. Without that element, I think art is just decorative. Just my opinion.
Anyone given any thought to what makes art interesting to you? I'd love to hear your thoughts.
User Comments
-
That is most times the case. I think it is not only about the disassociation but also the association to such a distinct depth that it surpasses the observers expectations. ...I like your blog-
thanks a lot. it's supposed to focus on art & politics, but it's rather heavy on philadelphia art events at the moment. i'm looking to create a little more balance. keep checking it out...and comment. please comment. i need the feedback
-
-
Look at your discussion. No comment is seen here. Still u don't get what makes art interesting...?-
be nice :-D
-
-
The proportionate rythm and harmony in the colours of an art work gives the observer a balanced perspective of easthetic beauty prevails in totality of the work.
talentsglobal.org/category/murals-of-kerala/-
but color...rhythm...harmony? isn't that more about the aesthetic? are you saying that art can't be interesting without being beautiful?
-
-
I don't think of it in terms of "surprise" but, yes, there is truth in what you say. Something clicks. Connects. And the image becomes fixed in the mind. A quick example is "Cristina's World" (sp?) by Andrew Wyeth. I was 20 years old. I had begin drawing and coloring as a kid and loved it, but I had no knowledge of "formal" art, fine art. (I grew up in a small rural Ozark county.) But at age 20, the family having moved to California, I became the first in my family to think about actually studying art. (I had served 3 years in the army, joining at age 17, and had just returned from 30 months in Germany). I enrolled in Pasadena City College. And had my first introduction to "Art". One day at the art library, thumbing through a coffee table book on American Artists, I flipped open a page - and there it was - "Cristina's World." It connected. The empty field. The rural building on the horizon, and the woman (I saw as a girl), alone, lonely, literally on the ground, yet straining forward, determined to move.
And I...I... - there are no words. I connected. I was there! I knew exactly where she was. She was a girl. But she was me.
I became intrigued by Wyeth. Who he was. Where he came from. Other works he had done. Even though I found my own path, a different direction pursuing my own work, "Cristina's World" remains a guidepost, a connecting point.
Thank you for the topic.-
great anecdote. i don't know the work, but now i'm intrigued. i'll check it out.
so you're saying it's the "...connecting point"? i like. must explore.
-
-
I'm presuming you're speaking of visual art only? For me, it's a combination of factors -- color, balance, movement. But there has to be a point of accessibility for me, a place for me to connect to what the piece depicts (even abstractly). And I have to be able to discern the artist's craft. Surprise is not enough for me... I need to understand intention.-
your comment is interesting. when you talk about "...being able to discern the artist's craft", what exactly do you mean? are we talking about deconstructing the process by which the art is made?
-
I guess it means that I have to be convinced that the piece isn't haphazardly created. There has to be virtuosity involved for a piece to be masterful enough to capture my imagination. Sometimes that can mean the artist is innovative... or they can employ classic techniques. But I have to be convinced that a great piece wasn't created by accident. And accident isn't art to me.
-
-
Materials, manipulation of those materials and presentation are the most important to me. Surprise or shock can be effective but I don't think they are necessary. -
I think it gets more interesting, though not necessarily easily likable, if it doesn't behave (or look or sound) exactly like you would expect it to in at least one (or maybe a few) way(s). Even if its a photograph, it should let you see something about the subject differently than you could normally if you just walked up to the subject or scene and looked at it on your own. The artist's eye, ear, or words, needs to invite you into a new experience. Of course, not everybody is ready for that; some people just want a gingham-covered goose cutout that matches their couch and would look good on their wall. I wouldn't say that was good art, unless it gave a more surprising experience of geese or gingham than those pieces usually give. That doesn't mean they have no value as decoration, of course (I know very nice folks who have them.) -
I think what makes art interesting is that it can be so intimate and revealing. The kind of art that touches me the the kind that say a lot about the artist's struggle or point of view. Do they see shadows or light, are the optimistic or pessimistic, do they think the world is ever changing or laying stagnant...all relayed to you in images or prose. I think that is the best thing about being one myself (writer). -
i really appreciate the food for thought guys! please keep it coming. it's really helping me to generate content.
-
Art is such a broad term.. because nowadays anything can be considered art if labeled as such. In that regards, I enjoy art that pushes the limits of what art can be.
However, thinking in terms of what art traditionally is, ie: paintings, drawings, sculptures, etc.. I find art with good balance interesting. The way your eye flows from the focal point to the rest of the piece is vital IMO. -
What interests me about art is that it's essentially useless and meaningless. It's a free thing because it serves no practical purpose whatever.-
I would have to disagree.. Art is used is so many ways, some more subtle than others. Take marketing / advertising for example, art is a key factor in any good marketing / advertising campaign.
We could go more abstract even.. how about automobiles? Are they not artistic in form and functionality? What about your furniture? -
Samureyed: The utilitarian aspect of the "art" you mention excludes it from my definition of art. Though I recognize there are all different definitions of art, and all equally valid. I was just stating what I personally find interesting about art.
-
-
Art is about expressing yourself freely and conecting with others beyond conventional forms communication. To be able to convey emotion to others by means of a painting, a sculpture, a poem, a song... is magic! -
Difference in style and creativity. Everyone has some personal view and expression. -
I think the surprise element is part of it. I also think that when a piece of art illuminates something inside yourself or some type of hypocrisy in society or brings attention to a pressing issue, like world hunger, then it is interesting because it serves a social function. But beauty in itself is a wonderful quality too. -
To some extent, I agree with R1VERT1LT, but from the opposite angle. To me, art is whatever the viewer/listener/reader/player (yes, I said player, I genuinely believe that if movies can be considered art, then some (admittedly very few, but some nonetheless) video games should be considered works of art) can take something profound from.
For me, the easiest things to draw something from are sadly those that are the most difficult to create - songs, prose or music that successfully capture and convey strong emotions with bare-faced honesty. -
The Interest Is Merely The Fact That A Certain Piece Of Art, Even Philosophy, Also Literature, Has Raised Some Hundred Radical Questions. And Shouldn't Necessarily Provide An Answer! Sufficiently, This Is Its Real Success.
After All, They Are The Mind's Mental Inkdrops, Constantly Dropping On The Canvas Of Life, For "Something", With A Feeling Either Of Companionship, Or Just For A, Rebellion! -
What it says about us, the world, where we want to be, and beauty and love. -
I think that interest, like beauty, is in the eye (or brain,) of the beholder. As such, there are millions of answers to your question & all of them are right. For example, I recently had a show where a young woman was really enamored of one of my abstracts. Her mother was less impressed, dismissing it w/o a second thought about me standing right there. Which one was "right?" Both of them. -
What makes a work of art interesting is your interest in it. The work itself has no intrinsic value.
-
The only intrinsic values are from within, and above.
-
-
That make interesting art is that you can see the soul of the human being, in a piece of art or art in general a man let all that he can there, if it is true art, and other people can see beauty, depth, forms, emotions, feelings, ideas, etc -
I like art that challenges me, stimulates my imagination.
Add Your Comment
Login to leave a message.
