Art is a notoriously ambiguous subject and name. In society today, the word art immediately brings to mind the intricate and time-intensive works of the Old Masters’ paintings and sculptures. But there is another face of art that I believe is becoming more and more obvious. The face that is a single large orange dot on a canvas. The face that is the holy cross submerged in urine (Serrano, Andreas. Piss Christ. 1987. Stux Gallery, New York.) All this is acclaimed as art by art critics, collectors and other artists. But what about a piece of driftwood sculpted carefully by the rivers and tides? Is this art? This poses an interesting questions regarding whether art must be produced by an artist. I believe that art does not need to be produced
…show more content…
The eternal question. Merriam-Webster defines art as “something that is created with imagination and skill and that is beautiful or that expresses important ideas or feelings.” While this explanation is thorough and accurately portrays many individuals’ ideas about art, I beg to differ. Art does not have to be beautiful. Art does not need to express important ideas or feelings. A foremost example of this is Marcel DuChamp’s Fountain. It is certainly not aesthetically pleasing, nor is it produced by DuChamp himself. By Merriam’s definition, Fountain would not be considered art. However, according to 500 of Britain’s foremost art professionals, Fountain is considered the most influential piece of art from the 20th century. My definition of art is a person or group of people using a special skill or quality to produce a piece that portrays their talent or an idea they may have. One may say that an artist produces a piece of art, but what is an artist? Simply someone who creates art with the intention of creating art. By create, I do not mean “create” in a traditional sense. An artist does not need to physically produce the piece; using pre-made materials, natural materials, etc to create a conceptual idea or physical art …show more content…
A piece of clothing produced by a machine is not made by the artist, but it is considered art if the creator believes or intends it to be. I personally believe that by holding art to the idea that it must be created by the artist, art is being limited. It is dangerous to confine art to a box it must fit in to be considered art. If an artist must produce the art for it to be considered art, the very idea of art is being crushed. Art is about expression of one’s talent or ideas. The conduit an artist uses to create their art is up to them. They could use themselves, a plastic surgeon or a fellow artist to create a piece. It is not up to another person to tell an artist what they can or cannot do with their
The eternal question. Merriam-Webster defines art as “something that is created with imagination and skill and that is beautiful or that expresses important ideas or feelings.” While this explanation is thorough and accurately portrays many individuals’ ideas about art, I beg to differ. Art does not have to be beautiful. Art does not need to express important ideas or feelings. A foremost example of this is Marcel DuChamp’s Fountain. It is certainly not aesthetically pleasing, nor is it produced by DuChamp himself. By Merriam’s definition, Fountain would not be considered art. However, according to 500 of Britain’s foremost art professionals, Fountain is considered the most influential piece of art from the 20th century. My definition of art is a person or group of people using a special skill or quality to produce a piece that portrays their talent or an idea they may have. One may say that an artist produces a piece of art, but what is an artist? Simply someone who creates art with the intention of creating art. By create, I do not mean “create” in a traditional sense. An artist does not need to physically produce the piece; using pre-made materials, natural materials, etc to create a conceptual idea or physical art …show more content…
A piece of clothing produced by a machine is not made by the artist, but it is considered art if the creator believes or intends it to be. I personally believe that by holding art to the idea that it must be created by the artist, art is being limited. It is dangerous to confine art to a box it must fit in to be considered art. If an artist must produce the art for it to be considered art, the very idea of art is being crushed. Art is about expression of one’s talent or ideas. The conduit an artist uses to create their art is up to them. They could use themselves, a plastic surgeon or a fellow artist to create a piece. It is not up to another person to tell an artist what they can or cannot do with their