On art

As a result of my last blog post, my mom and I got into a discussion about what constitutes "art."  Though both firm believers that art is not just anything someone says is art (I think art museums are full of post-modern work that is not art -- I do not consider "white on white" art regardless of the intent of the painter, I do not consider three basketballs in a fish-tank art, and I do not consider a urinal on a pedestal art... and I have frequently mentioned the Murphy Brown episode referenced in this article and discussed thoroughly in class with my amazing middle school art teacher as pretty succinctly summing up my opinion on the subject of postmodern art), we both agreed that there are multiple ways something can achieve the status of "art."  A simple realistic still life that produces no strong emotion but is nevertheless simply pleasing to the eye is as much art as a Hopper painting that provokes your imagination to create the circumstances, characters, and relationships captured in the image, which are both as much art as a beautiful Impressionist painting that transports you and captures a time of day and place perfectly, or a photograph of the ocean, or a Picasso painting that you can't stop staring at even if you think it's hideous, or an Escher drawing that you can't figure out, or a painting that produces an intense emotional or intellectual response but is in no way "beautiful."  I love the movie Oklahoma and have seen it probably 20 times.  It has wonderful songs that make me want to sing and dance, and I always finish it with a smile. To me, it's art.  It's not thought-provoking, it doesn't result in any deep conversations, but it makes me happy and is very well composed.  The movie I discussed in my last blog post did not make me feel happy at all, but it was obviously far more thought-provoking than a movie like Oklahoma.  Both, to me, are equal paths to achieving the status of "art."
 
When I briefly worked at Lincoln Center, there was a day that a man stood outside the theatre wearing a black unitard and lay down right in front of the window.  He was supposedly a one-man live art exhibit.  I was the only employee in the lobby that day who said that was not art just because the unitard-adorned man said it was.  Another employee told me, "Everything is art!  Art is totally subjective!"  I do believe art can be somewhat subjective, but not entirely so.  I strongly believe that both skill and vision with meaning, not just one or the other, are essential components of art.  If anyone could do something, I do not consider it art.  Art goes above the ordinary, even in its depiction of the ordinary.  Art reflects life, and is an expression of life taken to a heightened stage, and I believe that talent above the ordinary is necessary to achieve that.  So normally, I find myself in the small group of people who think a piece is not art when others are saying it is.  But talking to my mom, I mentioned the one recent "is it or isn't it art" piece in the news that I think is most definitely a wonderful work of art....

A New Year's Eve photograph taken in Manchester took the internet by storm a few weeks ago and was first hailed as on par with Renaissance art before being blasted by some critics who said that Renaissance artists put so much thought and planning into their work that it was an insult to compare this photograph to their work.  I disagree.  Art comes in many different forms -- and in photography, it is the eye of the photographer and the ability to recognize and capture a moment that are just as important to producing art as the painter's or sculptor's planning and preparation are to their work.  I think this photograph is fantastic -- both thought-provoking in its successful capture of the characters (particularly the woman in red) and pleasing visually with a balanced composition, and it is absolutely art.   My mom had never seen the photo and I had not told her my opinion of it before sending her the link while we were on the phone, but her immediate reaction was to comment that it reminded her somewhat of the multi-faceted works of Hieronymus Bosch (and if you really want to lose yourself in a single piece of art for an hour, try to decipher every element of his "The Garden of Earthly Delights").  The photograph's ability to capture the imaginations of so many art fans, whether they compare it to the work of Van Gogh, Michelangelo, Bosch, Seurat, or the Pretty Woman poster (really!), speaks to its success in capturing the same facets of humanity that painters strive to portray and interpret in their work. 

So here is a fascinating write-up of this photograph, and make sure to scroll to the end for all the unique interpretations of it, including an annotated breakdown of the elements (and that Pretty Woman poster!): http://twistedsifter.com/2016/01/nye-photo-from-manchester-is-modern-day-renaissance-masterpiece/