Tuesday, October 2, 2012
Standards of Art (at least "good art")
Defining standards for art can be tricky. This is because each individual has a different perspective. Weather it's taste buds or an opinion on a piece of art, we all have a unique point of view and perspective to provide. Although, there are a few broad standards that most people will agree with.
* Art should create an emotion in the consumer. And like I said this will be the same emotion, or a different emotion depending on who the consumer is. One person might see a painting of a human head without a body as a symbol for insecurity while another person might see it as meaningless absurdism.
* Art should be thought provoking. This is similar to creating an emotion, but also different in many aspects. For example: A scene in a film where a father argues with a mother while their young child secretly listens from upstairs. There is a good chance that a number of people watching this scene will relate to it on a personal level and provoke thoughts from personal experience, thus creating an emotion. This is major aspect of art, especially film, that make it so popular and timeless.
* An obvious standard is that art should provide entertainment. People go see superhero movies like The Avengers, because of the action, special effects and the overall epic-ness of them. It gets them out of the real world for 2 hours. It gets them out of their head and their day-to-day lives. This is the classic purpose of all forms of entertainment, especially television and film. Forget about your moms cancer; Captain America just saved the day.
* Art should inspire the consumer. This is especially for other artists consuming art. If your'e a painter and you go to an art show and see a painting of a guy with turquoise hair and even though it's no realistic, it looks interesting and it's thought provoking. Then you'll be like "Hey I never thought about giving somebody turquoise hair before." And then you'll incorporate that into your own work, while hopefully not ripping off the painting, but just simply being inspired by it. Another example is that a film about a lazy guy who eventually gets his shit together and achieves something by the end of the film will most likely spark inspiration in the consumer to get their shit together if it's not already together.
* Art should hold value. This is a sort of a tricky one because of all the absurdist forms of art. Some may argue that they are meaningless, therefore not art. And others may disagree and say anything is art. Well, it's all a matter of perspective. But I believe that most people would agree that the art with the most meaning, thought, emotion, and talent behind it is the most valuable and makes for real good art