Active Now

Malizz
Discussion » Questions » Arts » What do you expect of art in general?

What do you expect of art in general?

To introduce a fresh perspective, address social issues, prompt philosophical questions; perhaps simply to be beautiful, appealing, memorable (but then what makes it that?); or to leave you alone?

What is artistic to you and what gives art value?

Posted - November 28, 2017

Responses


  • 46117
    To arrest some inner awareness that needs attention.



    Picasso, father of Cubism as we know it.
      November 28, 2017 11:17 AM MST
    3

  • 1424
    Hey, Sharonna! What's with the "idiot wind?" I adore the wind! It's a symbol of inspiration in much of poetry--fittingly so, I think.

    Love Picasso and love the color blue, though I'm convinced that portrait, nice as it is, isn't of his hand. When you wrote "arrest," did you mean it in the sense of 'stop,' 'bring to a halt?'
      November 28, 2017 11:27 AM MST
    1

  • 5391
    Art should be able to inspire us, touch our senses, make us think or evoke a sense of wonder.


    Art, in my way of thinking is creating something beautiful from nothing. Beauty is, of course, in the eye of the beholder; art is much the same. 
      November 28, 2017 3:24 PM MST
    2

  • 1424
    Thanks, Don! I'll steer clear of the "what makes something beautiful" question then, but I do wonder what you make of inspiration: do you mean it in the sense that it stimulates you to action, to be creative yourself, or to change as a person? Or is it more abstract than that?
      November 29, 2017 4:51 AM MST
    1

  • 5391
    All of the above. Anything that brings about a new perspective or fresh energy. 
      November 29, 2017 5:29 PM MST
    1

  • 23090

    I've enjoyed art of all kinds for all the reasons you've mentioned, Danilo_G, whether it be for one of your stated reasons or a combination of several of them. I love that 'leave me alone' reason, too.
    :)

    Another similar thing I like with the fine arts is when I finish watching a film and/or listening to some music and my reaction is "What just happened?" I often respect art that sets me on edge and/or disturbs me -- but it has to strike me as disturbing NOT as an over-the-top attempt by an artist to try to disturb me with over-the-top slaps in the face.
    Yet, Michael Haneke's original 1997 film "Funny Games" remains THE most disturbing film I've seen and Haneke is definitely trying to disturb the audience but Haneke created a film masterpiece to me.
    :)
    (From what I've read, Haneke disagreed with portraying film violence as blockbuster fun entertainment -- so he created a small film with no gore -- and no graphic violence -- yet the movie is quietly vicious and disturbing.)

    I'm rambling now. I stop.
    :)
      November 28, 2017 7:03 PM MST
    1

  • 1424
    Hehe, some people don't like art and others seek escapism through it (which is arguably "leaving them alone"), so I felt I had to keep them in consideration too.

    Very interesting that you mention your reaction after observing art; that's a crucial factor to me too. The "what just happened" is a great way of looking at it--one that had escaped me thus far yet really can become a measure of the work's impact. I often ask myself "does this matter?" I.e. I may thoroughly have enjoyed a film, book, game, etc., but does it affect me, and others, for the better in the long run?

    Funny Games sounds like something I should see. I do generally like pieces that are critical of cliches and expectations within their own medium or genre (which Haneke's is, according to what I've found on the internet just now). That was intriguing to read, Welby--no rambling at all!
      November 29, 2017 4:58 AM MST
    1

  • 23090
    Thanks for your feedback, Danilo_G! The entire thread/question/comments are interesting to me.
    :)

    I'd be interested in your thoughts about "Funny Games" if you do end up seeing it sometime.
    :)


    This post was edited by WelbyQuentin at November 29, 2017 11:43 AM MST
      November 29, 2017 11:41 AM MST
    1

  • 6098
    To entertain and make me feel good. To improve the quality of life. 
      November 29, 2017 5:09 AM MST
    2

  • 1424
    "Quality of life," interesting. Is there also art that makes you feel bad, or somewhat thrown off, that you value nonetheless?
      November 29, 2017 11:02 AM MST
    1

  • 7919
    I don't "expect" anything from it. Each piece is different... or at least I think it should be. My current beau is an artist and art teacher, and I'm so far removed from the "scene" it's ridiculous. I don't know art history, any of the terms, or really anything about anything when it comes to art. But, we're constantly in situations where he'll ask me what I think about a particular piece, and I always feel like I'm grasping at straws. I can't give the "right" answer, I can only talk about how something makes me feel or how I see it through my personal lens. 

    Many pieces of art are windows to the artist's soul. You can look at them and soak them up. Feel what the artist felt. Sometimes it's pure bliss, other times it feels like your own heart is being ripped out.

    Other pieces are cultural- they convey messages of one's ancestors, of societal struggles, of traditions. They pass on those messages. 

    Some are designed to make you think about hard questions- politics, philosophy, ethics, morals. 

    Others are designed with little hidden messages, satire, and irony. Those can make you laugh or think.

    Some artists simply create beautiful things for the sake of decor, though I think these are largely the ones who are trying to make a career out of it, rather than letting their art flow from their minds and souls. Not that career artists are wrong or bad, but so many shift to creating pieces that look beautiful, but don't speak, so they can attract a wider audience and sell more.

    I'm not into art that doesn't speak in some way. In fact, when my ex husband moved out and I took everything off the walls to repaint, I only put one painting back up, and that was only because it was huge and I had no place to store it. lol My walls remained blank because I'd rather have nothing than pieces that are pretty, but aren't meaningful. I don't know how others see art, but because I tend to "feel" it, rather than search for messages, I don't generally care for things that make me feel anguish. I can look at them and appreciate them, but I wouldn't want to look at them every day. The art you surround yourself shapes your world and changes your mood. In my younger days, I was more drawn to pieces that conveyed a magic of sorts. I had loads of David Delmare prints- mermaids and fairies, as well as knights and maidens by Edmund Blair Leighton. I think it's safe to say my house had a real sense of naivety, whimsy, or even childhood magic back then. I slowly changed those out for more grown up art- renaissance-style paintings. Eventually, I wound up with my walls covered in gorgeous landscapes like Kincaid would do, and though beautiful, they meant nothing. I felt nothing while looking at them. I still have just the one painting on my wall- it's a brownish mountain landscape. My beau couldn't fathom why, out of all the things I could have up, that's the only one that stuck. When I explained it was only there because I had no place else to put it, he asked if he could pant into the picture. Right now, he's pondering adding Godzilla to it. lol Before that, it was going to be a UFO. I don't know how it's going to wind up, but if he ever gets around to it, it will most certainly become a piece that speaks to me. :)
      November 29, 2017 10:25 AM MST
    2

  • 1424
    That's a really thorough response and I like it very much. I'll just focus in on one bit: what is the value of 'looking through the window to the artist's soul and soaking it up?' Does it lie in empathy--understanding?

    You will post a picture of Godzilla (or anything else) making it into that painting, won't you?
      November 29, 2017 11:17 AM MST
    2

  • 7919
    I suppose the value is in my perspective. It's no different than what I do here, really, or anywhere else for that matter. I people watch. I like to try to understand what makes them tick. There are times I just like to feel, too- the way the wind can make you feel free as you drive down the freeway with the windows down, how you can feel the energy in a violent storm, the calm of a steady downpour, the love in an embrace, the good vibes/ well wishes behind a smile. You can watch a mother and child or a couple in public and feel the love emanating from them. Art is like that too. Emotion, good or bad, is part of being human. When you share an emotion with someone, it connects you.

    If/when he gets around to improving my painting, I'll be sure to share. :)


      November 29, 2017 2:50 PM MST
    2

  • 23090
     the calm of a steady downpour

    Excellent
    :)


      August 31, 2018 6:11 PM MDT
    1

  • 23090
    I LOVE the idea of adding Godzilla to that painting! Ha! Even if he doesn't actually add it, his idea of adding it displays his artistry.
    :)
      August 31, 2018 6:13 PM MDT
    1

  • I expect it to be better than this pretentious chit.
      November 29, 2017 10:29 AM MST
    2

  • 23090
    Somehow I still like it a bit -- perhaps the color choices.

    But It could use a LOT of help with a contribution from that Alex Meixner guy and Hormel pepperoni!
    ;)
      November 29, 2017 11:01 AM MST
    2

  • I have some old painting drop cloths that should be worth millions if Jackson Pollock was a genius and skilled artist.
      November 29, 2017 11:14 AM MST
    1

  • 23090
    :)
    :)
      November 29, 2017 11:30 AM MST
    0

  • 1424
    I strongly dislike any sort of pretension, particularly in art, but one can argue that such a painting does carry a particular energy. Figure I'd like to take a good look at it before playing in a big sports game, though that's probably not why people spend millions on the sort.
      November 29, 2017 11:20 AM MST
    1

  • It's paint splatters with no form.   It's what a monkey or 1 year old given paint does.
      November 29, 2017 11:23 AM MST
    0

  • 1424
    There is a difference in technique, but, yes, I'll often hear someone say that "anyone could do that" and that's a valid point. Then again, some may claim that it's the disposition behind the creation that gives it form, or how it affects the viewer.

    Of course, it becomes entirely empty once it gets to the point where people fawn over such a work simply because it has a certain artist's name attached to it.
      November 29, 2017 11:34 AM MST
    0

  • That's the definition of pretentiousness.
      November 29, 2017 11:48 AM MST
    1

  • 1424
    Sure, that's why I made the side note. I just meant that this need not necessarily be what people value in it.
      November 29, 2017 11:57 AM MST
    0