Art Beauty And Evil

In today’s society, we are constantly being bombarded with visual art forms. Whether they be classical paintings from the Renaissance, a towering and modern skyscraper, or even a cheesy 90’s R&B music video, they all have one thing in common. According to Carolyn Dean’s definition, these would all fall under the category of “art by intention.” In her essay “The Trouble with (The Term) Art” she advocates a distinction between art by intention and what she deems “art by appropriation.” The difference is that one work was created with the intention of being consumed for visual pleasure, while the other was not. However having been educated in the Western school of thought, many art historians cannot help but project their rigid definition of art onto civilizations that may have

Around two months ago, I posted an image of Paul Gustave Dore’s 1869 oil on canvas, ‘Andromeda,’ to a large Internet forum called ‘Reddit.’ If you’re unfamiliar with the website ‘Reddit’, it is simply a site that is heavily run by the contribution of users, providing open discussions about specific ideas and news. To my amazement, the post made it to the front page, receiving much attention, but along with it came other ethical discussions that related to art as a general consensus and how the idea of ‘beauty’ has influenced current viewers with their expectations for museums and galleries.

In a world that has become immune to accepting all types of art, Marya Mannes believes we have lost our standards and ability to identify something as “good” or “bad”. In her essay, “How Do You Know It’s Good”, she discusses society’s tendency to accept everything out of fear of wrongly labelling something as being good or bad. She touches on various criteria to judge art, such as the artist’s purpose, skill and craftsmanship, originality, timelessness, as well as unity within a piece rather than chaos. She says that an individual must decide if something is good “on the basis of instinct, experience, and association” (Mannes). I believe that by using standards and the process of association, we will be able to judge what makes an art piece good in comparison to others. However, Mannes forces me to consider the difference between what may be appealing versus what is actually good, and when deciding which art we should accept, which is truly more important. I believe that “good” and “bad” are two ends of a large, subjective spectrum of grey area. It is possible for a piece of art to be good in some areas and bad in others, and if something does not live up to all of our standards, it does not necessarily mean it should be dismissed. Thus, I believe my personal standards for judging art are based on which my standards are largely based on the personal reaction evoked from a piece of art. Though I agree with Mannes’ standards to an extent, I believe that certain standards, such as evoking a personal response, can be more telling of if a piece of art is good as opposed to its timelessness, or the level of experience of an artist in his/her craft.

Art by its nature is a subject of the philosophical, social, economic, political or religious context surrounding its creator. More often than not, a work of art addresses a specific topic or somewhat revolves around a particular person. Therefore, it is impossible to separate the context of a piece of painting, either historical or cultural, to its intrinsic value or the artwork's meaning. On the other hand, different cultures and time utilized specific conventions that govern the representation of objects of creativity. This essay highlights various pieces of art and their relationship to particular cultural, political, economic, or social settings. Moreover, it pinpoints how different times influence art presentation.

Art is one aspect of the past that has carried on for decades. Art in any form may it be poetry, novels, and playwright, sculpting as well as painting, has been an outlet for generations and continues to be an outlet and a means for expression. This paper will discuss “ The Mona Lisa” one of Da Vinci’s most famous paintings, as well as another great painting, Antonio Veneziano’s

Art work with freedom to express aesthetic seems always standing in an opposite pole to social constracted rule, such as ethics. Expecially when I walk in a contenpeary art galleary, it is often to hear commons about a work as “new”, “rebellion” or anti-something. In the chapter Guide for the Misbegotten, Tillman write about John Water, a “ reluctant ethicist” summerized by her, felt guilty about “using the Manson murders in a jokey, smart-ass way in [his] earilier films without the slightest feeling for the victims’ families or the brainwashed Manson Killer kids who were also victims in this sad and terrible case.” To have sympathy for victims is like an instinct of human being, to apologize for bring hurt to others are also common sense. However, what would Tillman and other writers write about John Waters if he followed common sense and old fasion, would his work be recommend just by what it is ? If not, then how to explain an art forgery of old painting made by contempoery painter is

Marya Mannes discusses the issue of evaluating the quality of art in her essay “How Do You Know It’s Good?” and encourages readers to speak up about our own opinions while also using her criteria to criticize art. Instead following other people’s opinion in fear of humiliation and rejection, we need to adhere to own personal thoughts to determine if an artwork is phenomenal or terrible. Mannes states that we need an order

Throughout human history people used to capture the reality of their time, express their feelings and share their impressions by copying both literally or figurative the mundane. The so-called artists have had different impacts in society all along the centuries. Only a few are currently taught in school, although the reverberation of their work is still impregnated in XXI Century. Nowadays, the term ‘artist’ can be used in reference of painters, sculptors, writers, singers, choreographers and other professions whose production are considered valuable culturally speaking. One of the main problems is that their work produce such a magnificent impact on the audience the artist is set aside and usually forgotten as a person, so they feel their rights to be violated.

America’s infatuation with labels was a relatively new trend in postmodern society. Andy Warhol’s “Silver Liz as Cleopatra” as well as his other pieces impacted societal views on modern art in relationship to value. Warhol had a strong belief that the loss of something in replicating an image was over powered by something of new value being created.

Is the controversial art a controversy or is it simply something that breaks the rules of everyday life? Is the artist's purpose to draw attention or is it actually to transmit a message through his/her artwork? Jose Rodolfo Loaiza Ontiveros is a Mexican artist who has created art with our favorite Disney characters and has painted them in uncommon situations.

According to David Hume, a great philosopher in 18th century, “Beauty in things exists in the mind which contemplates them.” As a result, “good art” is the judgement of individual base on their positive sentiment toward an artwork, and that is called the taste of art. Besides, David Hume also believes there is something will make an artwork better than others. To experience that belief, after falling in love with two artworks-“A Bull Fight” and “The Bonaventure Pine”- in the exhibition at Museum of Fine Art Houston, based on the personal taste of art to state that “A Bull Fight” is better artwork than “The Bonaventure Pine” even though both are beautiful.

The role which morality should play in art has been contested for as long as art has existed. Some say that art is to be used to influence society to become better, to teach the audience, while others say that art should be for arts sake, independent of society’s current view on morality. Three paintings from three different art periods will be explored to see how morality’s role in art is approached differently. David’s “The Death of Marat” shows how art can be a vehicle for moral education, Daumier’s “The Laundress on the Quai d’Anjou” honours character produced from suffering, and Manet’s “Olympia” harshly criticises France’s moral hypocrisies. Although not all artists set out to show morals in their art, their paintings subconsciously reflect the time that they were in, which involves society’s morals.

As literary critics, Plato and Aristotle disagree profoundly about the value of art in human society. Plato attempts to strip artists of the power and prominence they enjoy in his society, while Aristotle tries to develop a method of inquiry to determine the merits of an individual work of art. It is interesting to note that these two disparate notions of art are based upon the same fundamental assumption: that art is a form of mimesis, imitation. Both philosophers are concerned with the artist's ability to have significant impact on others. It is the imitative function of art which promotes disdain in Plato and curiosity in Aristotle. Examining the reality that art

Art is all around us. There are many different forms of art. It can be something created, captured, or it can be already existent. Not a single person is to say what makes something art because there is a different definition for everyone. However, there are a couple factors that come into mind whenever someone decides to declare something as art. In this essay I will be comparing and contrasting four different pieces of art. I will be discussing each art piece’s form, time period of creation, intention or purpose, and value. These four pieces of art are Michelangelo’s Pieta, Fountain by Marcel Duchamp, Mark Rothko’s No.61, and the “Oyster Dress” by Alexander McQueen. These works of art come in all different shapes and sizes but they are valued

For over two thousand years, various philosophers have questioned the influence of art in our society. They have used abstract reasoning, human emotions, and logic to go beyond this world in the search for answers about arts' existence. For philosophers, art was not viewed for its own beauty, but rather for the question of how art and artists can help make our society more stable for the next generation. Plato, a Greek philosopher who lived during 420-348 B.C. in Athens, and Aristotle, Plato’s student who argued against his beliefs, have no exceptions to the steps they had to take in order to understand the purpose of art and artists. Though these two philosophers made marvelous discoveries about the existence of art, artists, and