Can anything be art? Or is there a richer set of criteria for what art can and must be?
I do not believe that anything can be art and that there is a richer set of criteria for what art must be. I will justify this view within my essay. I will put forth the criteria for what I believe what can be considered art and why I think that. Some of these thoughts have been influenced by what I have read in the The Role of Theory in Aesthetics and, ‘What is Art? An Institutional Analysis aswell as other articles and readings.
In order for one to answer the question I must define what I believe to be art. Art is something that has value to it; it expresses an aspect or various aspects of normalities within a society, or is so polarising that it has a …show more content…
The reason that I consider this to be art is because it matches the cirteria that I set forth for what I believe constitutes to what art is. For me, this piece of art invokes a great array of emotions, therefor it immediately has emotional value to it. This piece of art that Rose presents is very polarising, the reason for this is that perspective plays a vital role on whether one would view this as art or not. I will two perspectives, why some may argue that it is not art and why other would argue the opposing. The reason why some may not view this as art is because they may critisce the level of skill that it entails to create such an image. This then brings up the question of whether something is art if anybody can do it. A person can only accept this questioning of Rose’s art if they believe the premise that anybody can construct that piece of work. We have seen in the past that art that people do which is considered to be possible to make by anybody is valuable. This thereby implies that even if that piece of art did not require much skill and can be created by anyone it can still be valued and auction for thousands. This has been seen when James Franco sold a piece of invisible art for $10,000. I think that invisble art is Another reason to why some may argue that this isn’t art because it is just names on a board with what appears to be an pregnant naked woman with what looks like blood on
I do not believe that anything can be art and that there is a richer set of criteria for what art must be. I will justify this view within my essay. I will put forth the criteria for what I believe what can be considered art and why I think that. Some of these thoughts have been influenced by what I have read in the The Role of Theory in Aesthetics and, ‘What is Art? An Institutional Analysis aswell as other articles and readings.
In order for one to answer the question I must define what I believe to be art. Art is something that has value to it; it expresses an aspect or various aspects of normalities within a society, or is so polarising that it has a …show more content…
The reason that I consider this to be art is because it matches the cirteria that I set forth for what I believe constitutes to what art is. For me, this piece of art invokes a great array of emotions, therefor it immediately has emotional value to it. This piece of art that Rose presents is very polarising, the reason for this is that perspective plays a vital role on whether one would view this as art or not. I will two perspectives, why some may argue that it is not art and why other would argue the opposing. The reason why some may not view this as art is because they may critisce the level of skill that it entails to create such an image. This then brings up the question of whether something is art if anybody can do it. A person can only accept this questioning of Rose’s art if they believe the premise that anybody can construct that piece of work. We have seen in the past that art that people do which is considered to be possible to make by anybody is valuable. This thereby implies that even if that piece of art did not require much skill and can be created by anyone it can still be valued and auction for thousands. This has been seen when James Franco sold a piece of invisible art for $10,000. I think that invisble art is Another reason to why some may argue that this isn’t art because it is just names on a board with what appears to be an pregnant naked woman with what looks like blood on