What is Art?
It has long been debated what art is, what constitutes good or bad art, and who gets to decide. In the ancient world, artists were largely regarded as artisans or craftsmen. While certain individuals were widely recognized and celebrated for their technical skills, their works typically adhered to the established artistic conventions of their time. Personal creative expression was neither expected nor the reason why these artists were revered among artists of their era.
The Renaissance Shift
The Renaissance marked a significant shift, elevating the status of the artist as an individual. During this period, the unique contributions of artists began to be acknowledged and valued. Michelangelo’s famous quote, “I saw the angel in the marble and carved until I set him free,” reflects this newfound recognition of personal artistic vision. Similarly, the social elevation of artists in Renaissance Italy is evident in Albrecht Dürer’s remark. “Here I am a gentleman; at home, only a parasite.” This highlights the respect and admiration artists commanded during this transformative period.
The Romantic Artist
The notion of the artist as someone inherently different, blessed by God with unique talents or insights, and perhaps misunderstood by society, driven by intense passions and creativity, has its origins in Romanticism. Lord Byron is a prime example of this tortured hero persona. I’m not sure, of course, if he was misunderstood for his art as much as for his numerous scandalous affairs, including an alleged affair with his half-sister. The romanticized image of the artist, however, continued into the mid-19th century. The bohemians were artistic communities in places like Paris, often living in poverty on the fringes of society. Puccini’s opera La Bohème offers a vivid portrayal of this bohemian life.
Contemporary artists
Who are the artists today? In our time, there are renowned art schools that require a small fortune to attend, especially in the US. The “tortured” aspect still seems to be part of the package, particularly when it comes to paying back student loans. While there are still self-taught amateurs without formal education, it’s much harder to make it that way. Unless you’re fortunate enough to be discovered at the right time and place. I nonetheless think that anyone can be an artist. If you have something to say and are inclined to share it with the world, you can find a way to do so. The effort you invest in your work is crucial. I believe that while having ideas is the essential first step, mastering the techniques to bring them to life is equally important. At least for most forms of art. This may not apply if you’re a conceptual artist, where the idea itself is the primary artistic product.
Is This Art?
Is this art? Even if you’re a well-meaning individual who has visited a contemporary art museum or gallery, you’ve likely wondered at times if what you’re seeing is really art. Some people attribute a metaphysical quality to these works, believing that while it may indeed be art, their eye is not trained enough to grasp its sublime meanings, or that it’s beyond their mere mortal comprehension. This often discourages them from visiting such exhibitions. Then there are others who scrutinize an artwork as if it holds the secrets of the universe—changing angles, moving back and forth—and in the end, the artwork in question is Marcel Duchamp’s Fountain. It seems that every modern art book makes some reference to that urinal, and to quote Blackadder, you might think, “This is art’s greatest moment since Mona Lisa sat down and told Leonardo da Vinci she was in a slightly odd mood.” I’m not denying that Duchamp’s ready-mades introduced a new approach that transformed how we perceive art, but at the end of the day, the urinal is still just a urinal. The art lies in the idea that this object could be repurposed.
A matter of curation
In most cases, I believe the main issue is a lack of context, which discourages people. Many works are meaningless without an understanding of the artist’s intentions. If an exhibition is well-curated, you’re usually provided with the information necessary to grasp these intentions. Otherwise, you have to do your own research beforehand. For example, at the Pinault Collection’s “Le Monde Comme Il Va” exhibition in Paris, a prime example of an exhibition that provided such information. I encountered an “Untitled” work by Doris Salcedo. It was a column of neatly piled white shirts, pierced by two spikes. This is not something you can easily decipher without knowing more about the artist and her intent. And since more works than you’d think are titled “Untitled,” it’s always a bit of a pickle to figure out what the work is about. The work I’ve mentioned here commemorates two massacres of banana plantation workers in Colombia in 1988, with the shirts symbolizing the traditional attire of the workers. It serves as a monument to the anonymous victims of those tragedies.
What Makes Art Good?
Many contemporary art books confidently assert, often with an overly optimistic tone, that if an artist intends something as art, then it is art. Whether it’s good or bad, they argue, will be judged by history, depending on whether it endures over time. Artists have even canned their excrement—I’m referring to Piero Manzoni’s Merda d’artista—though no one has actually verified what the cans contain. Whenever something seems completely absurd, it’s often labeled as a commentary on the commercialization of art. It’s described as challenging or redefining the boundaries of art, the value of the artist in the market, and so on.
The truth is, you can find clever words to justify anything. If someone is an established artist, they seem to have a sort of carte blanche to present anything as art. But it’s also true that the guy allegedly pooped in those cans in 1961, and we’re still talking about it. At the very least, it’s thought-provoking. There’s no inherent value in art—only what collectors, investors, musuems and institutions are willing to pay. This value that can be influenced by gallerists and the art market in general. But in the end, this shouldn’t matter. For most of us, art is about our pleasure, intelleactual engagement, appreciation of the artist’s creativity and self-expression. Furthermore, it can hold a cultural or historical significance.
Can I be the judge?
I’m not an art critic or historian, but simply someone who appreciates art and seeks a meaningful way to evaluate what I see. Despite centuries of debate on the subject, I find the methodology proposed by Alessandro Manzoni, and later adopted by Goethe, both valid and relevant. I believe that anyone can discern the quality of an art piece by asking these three straightforward questions. Your responses will guide you in determining whether a work of art, whatever its nature, is good or bad:
- What was the artist trying to achieve?
- Did the artist succeed in achieving it?
- Was it worth doing?
Alessandro Manzoni
Discover more articles in this category: Art
Leave a Reply