The Last Buffalo
22 hours ago
Sunday, September 27, 2009
Tuesday, September 22, 2009
Looking at art...
What is the point of art? Who is it for? Is the artist's story of importance? What is the significance of the artist's intent? How does the audience fit into the picture?
The way I see it, art has many functions. Art can enlighten people, tell a story, share an idea or an emotion, dive into history, advertise, challenge traditions, evoke questions, etc.
It's possible that in all of these functions, however, many (including myself) have put too much emphasis on the intent of the artist, trying too hard to understand where they were coming from, and what they were trying to get across.
Yesterday, I was drawn in to a new perspective of sharing art. What if we shouldn't lean so heavily on the artist's perspective? What happens if we just let a painting be a work of art without any explanation or defined meaning? What happens when we don't demand to know the details of what inspired the art?
Dan Siedell, a high school art teacher from the Northwest, came with these ideas to challenge not only the way we think about and perceive art, but also the way we create and present it. He wrote a book in order to explore some of these thoughts, and share them with others. I admit I failed to read the exerpts provided for us before the lecture, but should you be interested in checking out some of his thoughts from his book, you can take a look at the introduction/ch.1 (my appologies that the conclusion file I was sent failed to work). I still intend to read it when I have time. The ideas Siedell shared were very interesting to me. I was glad for what I perceived to be a fresh perspective on what art is and how we look at it, but it also got me questioning.
I can really appreciate the things Siedell brought up about the value of an artwork when it is regarded by the viewer in the context of their own experiences, perspective, beliefs, and current situation. At the same time, part of me felt that in taking the heavy emphasis off of the artist's story, intent, and perhaps message, it was almost lost. I'm not ready to completely let go of the value this has in the art world. I think there is still room for the artist to guide the audience's perception of a work in certain cases. I guess I'm just not entirely sure yet, when that would be.
Any ideas or thoughts? I think this is worth exploring :) I'm looking forward to diving in and wrestling with some different perspectives and ideas!
The way I see it, art has many functions. Art can enlighten people, tell a story, share an idea or an emotion, dive into history, advertise, challenge traditions, evoke questions, etc.
It's possible that in all of these functions, however, many (including myself) have put too much emphasis on the intent of the artist, trying too hard to understand where they were coming from, and what they were trying to get across.
Yesterday, I was drawn in to a new perspective of sharing art. What if we shouldn't lean so heavily on the artist's perspective? What happens if we just let a painting be a work of art without any explanation or defined meaning? What happens when we don't demand to know the details of what inspired the art?
Dan Siedell, a high school art teacher from the Northwest, came with these ideas to challenge not only the way we think about and perceive art, but also the way we create and present it. He wrote a book in order to explore some of these thoughts, and share them with others. I admit I failed to read the exerpts provided for us before the lecture, but should you be interested in checking out some of his thoughts from his book, you can take a look at the introduction/ch.1 (my appologies that the conclusion file I was sent failed to work). I still intend to read it when I have time. The ideas Siedell shared were very interesting to me. I was glad for what I perceived to be a fresh perspective on what art is and how we look at it, but it also got me questioning.
I can really appreciate the things Siedell brought up about the value of an artwork when it is regarded by the viewer in the context of their own experiences, perspective, beliefs, and current situation. At the same time, part of me felt that in taking the heavy emphasis off of the artist's story, intent, and perhaps message, it was almost lost. I'm not ready to completely let go of the value this has in the art world. I think there is still room for the artist to guide the audience's perception of a work in certain cases. I guess I'm just not entirely sure yet, when that would be.
Any ideas or thoughts? I think this is worth exploring :) I'm looking forward to diving in and wrestling with some different perspectives and ideas!
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)
