It Isn T Pretty But Is It Art Diana Mack Analysis

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.

Carr relies heavily on the use of ethos, pathos, and logos throughout his essay. His ethos is mainly focused on connecting with the reader as a fellow human being. His logos is mainly comprised of quoting experiments and referencing historical

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.

Leo Steinberg’s Other Criteria focuses on how America’s view on art differs from that of other Countries and many of the problems that ensue when artists create art in America. Also, how critics and viewers of art should perceive different pieces and how to cope with differing views. Steinberg later goes on to discuss the problems with how certain groups of people can perceive an art piece negatively, when it might not be a negative piece.

In the contemplation of art, or rather the conceptually intangible definition it currently possess, it is imperative to be mindful that “art” has been utilized as a promotional device, ceremonial item, aesthetically purposed article or perhaps none of these or all. It is because of this vague term that Carolyn Dean, in her text, “The Trouble with (The Term) Art”, makes a case for the consequences of applying the term “art” in societies that lacked such a notion which also accounts for the Western-centric lens the field intrinsically utilizes when viewing non-Western art. The claim is deftly supported by the utilization of expert accounts in the subject, alternative perspectives for what is considered the current norm, and self-examining questions,

Controversial pieces of art are nothing new; artists express their opinions and beliefs in their work, and those who see the artist’s views as problematic speak out against it. Art encourages debate, and debates can be angry and emotion-driven. But when a piece of art is created that is almost universality looked upon as having corrupt morals, the debate tends to switch “I disagree with what this art portrays” to, “this work of art should not be allowed in society, regardless of its quality.”

This bids fair to a maxim erroneously accredited to Friedrich Nietzsche — that aesthetics, in art or science, is no longer a question of "I do my thing, you do yours." Yet, in point of fact, integrating artistic verdict with truth, prettiness, and forthrightness is, in the times we now live in, more than utterly obligatory than ever before. Not only because the US, or our world, has woken up to actuality and vowed to exterminate Frankenstein monsters that it once created, or encouraged.

This question was made to get past the “ I’ll know it when I see it” (TTU Political Science Department 2015) viewpoint and get straight down to the point of the object under scrutiny. The second one is,” does it describe or depict sexual conduct in an offensive way?” (TTU Political Science Department 2015) Albeit, the word offensive can vary from person to person but using the previous example the painting was of a Greek sculpture, and no graphic words were added to the painting. The reason for this question is to show the meaning behind the work which helps aid in the third question.  Finally, the third is “does the work lack any artistic, political, literary or scientific value?” (TTU Political Science Department 2015) The last question is meant to tie all of the previous questions

Museums and institutions have to handle controversies and tough subject matter. There is no easy solution in handling them that will please everyone. However, there some ways that are better than others. For the issues that surround race, I believe there is one way that is better than the rest. I believe the correct way to display works of art or any other offensive work is to give the proper background context of the article. With this proper context, it is necessary to understand the impact the work can have on all different races and to be empathetic with the feeling it can create. To go with this, it is necessary for museums and historic places to be a place of debate. In my analysis I will show several different

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.

The crossing of art and politics is an interesting one, and can be inspiring, or contentious, even discreditable.

People have different perspectives of different types of artwork, therefore is it possible to differentiate between what is appropriate for the public and what is not? Conservatives are often appalled by more explicit piece of art because it is too revealing. Some may even consider some artwork too similar to pornography, but there is nothing wrong with that. It is said that “Pornography comes in as many varieties as the human sexual impulse and is protected by the First Amendment unless it meets the definition for illegal obscenity” (American Civil Liberties 6). Therefore, it is legal to have revealing pieces of art as long as they do not fall into the category of obscenity. People believe the human body is a beautiful piece of art but so is the sky. Different people appreciate different things. It all depends on perspective. Additionally, William Schramm opened an erotic art gallery. He had heard people were bringing their artwork hours away because the local galleries would not display them. He says,“I may not agree with some of the images in here, they might not be my cup of tea, but I will defend their right to show it” (Silva 2). Schramm is a perfect example of how art should be treated. He is ethically correct because he wants all types of art to have their chance to shine because

Did I yearn to feel enlightened? Did I wish to experience some divine revelation? Maybe it was unfair of me to hold the piece to such high standards, but, then again, the whole world awarded it such high esteem. Now, having seen the painting, I continued with the assignment by searching the work on google images, and this time I was not at a loss for words. I saw the meticulous, painstaking detail. I analyzed the dynamics of the piece with skills learned from A History of Art and Music. I identified the characteristics of the Renaissance. I witnessed the subjects illustrious ability to follow any and all onlookers. I saw what made the painting great. In this instance, I think I found a prime example of how humans tend to idolize things or, rather, are conditioned to idolize things before we can discern our own appreciation for them. Now, I’m not saying that it’s not justified because it is; the Mona Lisa is a special painting, enshrouded in mystery. However, standing amongst the crowd of spectators jostling one another for a better view, I only saw the meager face of a

In the next slide we see the figure of McCloud with his arms spread out opposite each other. One arm holding back books and the other holding back paintings. McCloud says that “traditional thinking has long held that truly GREAT works of art and literature are only possible when the two are kept at arm’s length” (McCloud 740). A closer look reveals that the books he is holding back are some of the most renowned books ever written including the Holy Bible, “To Kill a Mockingbird”, and “Moby Dick”. The paintings include paintings by Van Gogh. McCloud provides these great works of art and literature in order to support what he said. McCloud does not however, wish to use these examples to persuade people that pictures and words should be kept separate. His goal is to convince people that the same literary greatness can be reached with comics.