|
Appreciation of Art
|
|
| Teacher | Date: Wednesday, 08.02.2012, 23:01 | Message # 1 |
 Head teacher
Group: Admins
Messages: 375
Status: Offline
| What is art appreciation? Who has a right to appreciate art? Can there be different form and levels of appreciation? Can a "man in the street" appreciate a work of art professionally? And do we really need a professional look at art?
In Vino Veritas...
|
| |
| |
| 8davids8 | Date: Thursday, 09.02.2012, 11:48 | Message # 2 |
 Union organizer
Group: Admins
Messages: 166
Status: Offline
| A work of art can transmit the information which is necessary to comprehend what lies under the canvas or between the lines of the frames. A work of art is intended to evoke some feelings or emotions, which means that it can make a sensitive observer understand the work deeper and clearer. Very often artists contribute a lot of personal experience into their works, which makes it necessary to learn something about the life of an artist. Sometimes it’s necessary, but in both cases an author takes inspiration and grounds for creating something from the life around him. The conversation between an artist and an observer is based upon the message transmitted by the work into the mind of an observer and this message is reflected though the personal experience that an observer possesses.
|
| |
| |
| Rina | Date: Thursday, 09.02.2012, 12:42 | Message # 3 |
 Union committee president
Group: Friends
Messages: 208
Status: Offline
| For me appreciation is something purely personal, it's not an objective category and that's why one person can appreciate the thing that will be of no interest for others. Appreciation is closely connected with admiration and therefore it is mostly based on one's emotions and feelings. For example, when a picture catches your attention and changes your emotional state, when it influences what you feel, you undoubtedly appreciate it. Some people may even say that at this moment you appreciate not a work of art, but the emotions it evokes in your sole. For instance, people admire Raphael's Madonna not because of the manner of painting and not because of the colours, but because of strange but peaceful feeling one experiences looking at it.
|
| |
| |
| Ayayulia | Date: Thursday, 09.02.2012, 13:38 | Message # 4 |
 Union organizer
Group: Friends
Messages: 126
Status: Offline
| The appreciation of art is a very complicated issue and it completely depends on the observer. But who is an observer exactly who has a right to be an observer? Now there is a tendency to reckon different things in the art area, that in my opinion isn’t art at all, e.g. a music made with the help of artist’s stomach, or piles of litter representing something deep and important. At the same time real works of arts, that the majority of people like and accept are called "a commerce" and hasn’t high value for critics. Nowadays the ugliest works are mostly described because they affect, irritate or even hurt. I think that no matter what critic’s review the work of art has, its appreciation depends on you. As I am an observer I will make conclusions irrespective of other opinions.
|
| |
| |
| Megastarosta | Date: Thursday, 09.02.2012, 13:46 | Message # 5 |
 Union organizer
Group: Friends
Messages: 126
Status: Offline
| There are three aspects of art that buld the appreciation : the personal interest, the inspiration of an artists and the experience of a master. And finally it is the technique. According to my own experience I can say that I agree with these three statements and I have nothing to add. The inspiration gives birth for paintings and other means of art, that is why it is the most important and central position here. Inspiration feeds off by the experience and inner feelings. There isn’t any art work that goes without an interpretation of the personal state of the author. That is why we can find that many paintings wont and wouldn’t be finished because the sense that the artist had, was lost.
|
| |
| |
| Teacher | Date: Thursday, 09.02.2012, 16:37 | Message # 6 |
|
Head teacher
Group: Admins
Messages: 375
Status: Offline
| As far as I understand quality is very subjective. And we can also say that quality is a many sided phenomenon. And here we can say that quality depends on the observer. If it is the man in the street I doubt that he can examine the work of art professionally. At the same time his estimation is based on the work of art itself with its message and emotions. I mean that the man in the street examines the work of art from the point of view of its content, but only then the form. If we speak about some critic who also examines the work of art, his estimation will be aimed at searching for disadvantages and defects. Well, as it is said quality has different perspectives.
In Vino Veritas...
|
| |
| |
| Asya | Date: Friday, 10.02.2012, 12:13 | Message # 7 |
 Union committee president
Group: Moders
Messages: 298
Status: Offline
| Quote (Seagull) If it is the man in the street I doubt that he can examine the work of art professionally. If we speak about some critic who also examines the work of art, his estimation will be aimed at searching for disadvantages and defects.
Are you sure? why can't "the man in the street" search for drawbacks and the critic simply admire the work?!
Moreover, I suppose that only people who have got special education "can examine the work of art professionally"professionally means relying on special knowledge. One should either be taught to do that, or simply be an Art-fan and read professional literature.
But I'm convinced that Art is not about "a professional view". Art should be for everybody. But everybody get as much from the work of Art as he/she can. That's like reading a book. Everybody understands the plot. But someone may follow only the main conflict, and someone else may observe a dozen of minor plot-lines, themes and problems raised.
|
| |
| |
