by Buff
Hank and I recently visited my brother Mike and my sister-in-law Gail, and got to talking about the subject of art, since we are all artists. Mike and Hank have been professional artists, earning their livings at it – Hank in still-life commercial photography and now his wooden vases, and Mike in advertising/marketing and now, with fine pastel work. I work mostly in fiber, and Gail works in glass and jewelry, after a full career with a doctorate of nursing and head of a nursing graduate program. I, of course, am still “lawyering,” having become used to three meals a day.
Some time previously, Mike had looked at my fabric collage hangings and gave his opinion that this one was art, that one wasn’t, etc. I pressed him to give me a “why” for his opinions, and he said something about how presenting a message to the viewer lifted a work from a pretty piece to art.
I reminded him of this session when we were sitting around the dining table, and asked him to tell me why one of his landscapes was “art,” but one of my collages was not. We dismissed the ridiculous distinction between “art” and “craft,” but ventured forth to the question of “what is art?”
There are many definitions of art. My Webster’s says “. . . the making or doing of things that have form and beauty. . . products of creative work. . . “
Wikipedia says “. . . a skill is being used to express the artist’s creativity, or to engage the audience’s aesthetic sensibilities, or to draw the audience towards consideration of the finer things.” [emphasis in original] “. . . artworks are . . . compelled by a personal drive . . . and convey a message, mood, or symbolism for the viewer to interpret. . . “
Further from Wikipedia, “Art is something that stimulates an individual’s thoughts, emotions, beliefs, or ideas through the senses. . . . The purpose of works of art may be to communicate ideas, such as in politically, spiritually, or philosophically motivated art; to create a sense of beauty. . . ; to explore the nature of perception; for pleasure; or to generate strong emotions. The purpose may also be seemingly nonexistent.”
In his essay entitled, “What is Art?,” Leo Tolstoy said art is not a manifestation of God, not a game, not the expression of man’s emotions, not the creation of pleasing objects, not pleasure. It is “. . . a means of union among men, joining them together in the same feelings, and indispensable for the life and progress toward well-being of individuals and of humanity.”
Frank Lloyd Wright said that “Art is a discovery and development of elementary principles of nature into beautiful forms suitable for human use.”
Mike said that his goal in painting is to interpret his personal reaction to a scene or event so that the viewer also forms a reaction which – while not necessarily the same as his – is no less personal.
I said that I like to create beauty in a world that is not always beautiful; I often try to convey the message that our world – especially our natural world – is fragile and wondrous and should be looked on with awe and gratitude. Sometimes I just like to create a “pretty picture.”
Hank pointed out that timing can be critical for recognizing a work as art. He described seeing many years ago a simple right-angle construction of clear plastic panes; Although the material was clear, the light on it created a shadow. That may sound ho-hum to us, but it was created at the beginning of the age of plastics. Part of art is the creation of something that was not there before.
Hank described walking through an art exhibit years ago with his niece, who kept saying, “Oh, I could do this” and “I could do that.” Patience exhausted, Hank said to her, “But you didn’t!” Someone else had the idea and created something that was not there before. That is even more obvious when a whole new style is created – Impressionism, for example. It shakes up the received wisdom of what art is “supposed” to be.
I have to say I have trouble with some of what has recently been billed as “art.” I went to the Museum of Modern Art (MOMA) a few years ago, and just could not see the art in a pink board leaning against a wall. I was similarly underwhelmed by a room full of what looked like striped awning material. Sometimes I think artists have their tongues firmly in cheek and see what they can pass off to a gullible public.
Maybe art is like pornography, as immortalized by US Supreme Court Potter Stewart in 1964. Maybe he couldn’t it define it. “[B]ut I know it when I see it.”
What do you think? Put in your two cents' worth!
