Most art historians are divided by the two following opposing beliefs about art. Art is about?

a) emotions versus realism.
b) the elements and principles of art versus its cultural significance.
c) reality versus imitating reality.
d) fooling the eye versus fooling the mind.

I’d pick “B”.
For years what was “art” was defined by particular academies who dictated exactly how a work of art should be. Figures were meant to be depicted in a particular way and in certain proportions, many things were taboo and so on. Everyone who wanted to “male it” was expected to toe the “party line”.
Then the 20th century came along and blew a lot of that out of the water (Cubism, for example).
Did these artistic movements influence culture or were they influenced by the culture? (Is this the chicken or the egg question?)
There are so many “-isms” (impressionism, expressionism, fauvism, surrealism, minimalism. cubism, realism…) and emotions run throughout (for example, the expressionists weren’t particularly “realistic” but they sure were emotional!).
And there’s the saying: “Art imitates life” or is it “Life imitates art”?
That’s why I’d choose “B”.

vangelis – la petite fille de la mer – Slideshow jim warren art

Comments are closed