Graceshous Shearon
For me, when things stopped being considered as art, is pretty much sprinkled throughout most of America’s art history and it is sadly at the end of European’s art history. So, for both America and Europe there was not a long period where things did not seem like art. For America, it was more a sprinkling of finding a sort of identity through the wreckage and for Europe it was more for a rebellion and change of heart after the war. I do not think it ever stopped not being art but it had sections to when I thought that it was stretching the meaning of art, which I know that most artists were trying to stretch that belief in America. There are some points to where I am just like “They really thought this could pass as art?”. In the end, it was considered art during that time.
First starting with Europe, for me I did not …show more content…
To me art is a thing that must be able to move me, not just visually but also mentally and emotionally. With art, I should be able to feel that I could conquer the world, cry to my mother, or slap a total stranger in the face. I want to be able to convey emotions that I did not know I had. I also, feel like that art should show a certain talent that most people do not possess, like Chuck Close and his photorealism, that there takes some real talent. Another thing art must do is have meaning. Art must have reason to why even create it, either to tell a story, to stand up for something, or to just simply change up the art “game”. Not having meaning to something you do, is like not having wheels for your car, in the end you are not going to go anywhere or accomplish anything. Art also must have that wow factor, to where just walking by something I will do a double take to see what it was. Lastly, what matters most to me, is that art must be able to bring people together. Bringing people together is what makes things happen and hopefully also bring a change. Art that does that has achieved a big prize if it can do
For me, when things stopped being considered as art, is pretty much sprinkled throughout most of America’s art history and it is sadly at the end of European’s art history. So, for both America and Europe there was not a long period where things did not seem like art. For America, it was more a sprinkling of finding a sort of identity through the wreckage and for Europe it was more for a rebellion and change of heart after the war. I do not think it ever stopped not being art but it had sections to when I thought that it was stretching the meaning of art, which I know that most artists were trying to stretch that belief in America. There are some points to where I am just like “They really thought this could pass as art?”. In the end, it was considered art during that time.
First starting with Europe, for me I did not …show more content…
To me art is a thing that must be able to move me, not just visually but also mentally and emotionally. With art, I should be able to feel that I could conquer the world, cry to my mother, or slap a total stranger in the face. I want to be able to convey emotions that I did not know I had. I also, feel like that art should show a certain talent that most people do not possess, like Chuck Close and his photorealism, that there takes some real talent. Another thing art must do is have meaning. Art must have reason to why even create it, either to tell a story, to stand up for something, or to just simply change up the art “game”. Not having meaning to something you do, is like not having wheels for your car, in the end you are not going to go anywhere or accomplish anything. Art also must have that wow factor, to where just walking by something I will do a double take to see what it was. Lastly, what matters most to me, is that art must be able to bring people together. Bringing people together is what makes things happen and hopefully also bring a change. Art that does that has achieved a big prize if it can do