Bright colors. Intricate sounds. Abnormal shapes. Fluid movements. Curiosity and wonderment invoked. As a child, I never understood why art was created. But I never got that far because I mostly focused on what was tangibly in front of me and not what was underneath: the artwork's purpose. I always found myself fascinated of how the artist was capable of creating such a work of art that I found myself wanting to achieve. I did not realize that there was a bigger concept behind art. In Ralph Waldo Emerson's article called “Art”, he talks about how he defines art as well as its purpose and in Scott Momaday's article “The Arrowmaker”, he explains the power of language. Despite referring to different forms of art, both articles clarifies its significance.
…show more content…
Like a child, who sees one of Picassos paintings or who reads one of Shakespeares plays. This can even occur in adults. Why some people are unable to “receive” an artist's message through their artwork is because people do not notice or do not think of the artist's message. Those people are entranced by the technique of an art work, such as poetry and abstract painting, or by passerby distractions, like an advertisement. However, if one puts in effort, anyone can find a deeper meaning in an artwork. By finding the message in a piece of art, a person is given or shown a new perspective one has not thought of beforehand. Searching the artists message in their artwork also provides one an enriching experience which can influence someone to continue to look and or listen to other art …show more content…
In Emerson's article, he explains the purpose of artwork describing it as “when your heart is touched by genius. [Artwork] was not painted for [picture-dealers], it was painted for you” (585). This is an explicitly spoken concept by the author, who is supporting the idea that art has beauty by using Raphael's The Transfiguration as an example, which affects the person who sees the piece of art (Emerson 584). This is an effective way of using logos to support his claim because he used an existing artwork to help support his claim that arts beauty is meant for others and not for the artist. With the beauty of an artist's work, a person can be moved which is why Emerson states that art works are meant for the public. I can neither agree nor disagree on this subject because I feel like when an artist creates their work, they are creating for themselves and not for others. On the other hand I agree with Emerson because there are instances where most art work carries the artist's message and when their work is showcased, the art isn't meant for professionals but for public citizens because the artist wants to show their work to the world. The artist probably wants acknowledgement of their work more so than criticism of how the artist created their
Like a child, who sees one of Picassos paintings or who reads one of Shakespeares plays. This can even occur in adults. Why some people are unable to “receive” an artist's message through their artwork is because people do not notice or do not think of the artist's message. Those people are entranced by the technique of an art work, such as poetry and abstract painting, or by passerby distractions, like an advertisement. However, if one puts in effort, anyone can find a deeper meaning in an artwork. By finding the message in a piece of art, a person is given or shown a new perspective one has not thought of beforehand. Searching the artists message in their artwork also provides one an enriching experience which can influence someone to continue to look and or listen to other art …show more content…
In Emerson's article, he explains the purpose of artwork describing it as “when your heart is touched by genius. [Artwork] was not painted for [picture-dealers], it was painted for you” (585). This is an explicitly spoken concept by the author, who is supporting the idea that art has beauty by using Raphael's The Transfiguration as an example, which affects the person who sees the piece of art (Emerson 584). This is an effective way of using logos to support his claim because he used an existing artwork to help support his claim that arts beauty is meant for others and not for the artist. With the beauty of an artist's work, a person can be moved which is why Emerson states that art works are meant for the public. I can neither agree nor disagree on this subject because I feel like when an artist creates their work, they are creating for themselves and not for others. On the other hand I agree with Emerson because there are instances where most art work carries the artist's message and when their work is showcased, the art isn't meant for professionals but for public citizens because the artist wants to show their work to the world. The artist probably wants acknowledgement of their work more so than criticism of how the artist created their