I was reading the reading for next Tuesday, and the author talked about the definition of art, which makes me recalled this story below.
I was always interested in art, so I went to visit one of the most famous place in Beijing that related with art: 798. However, unfortunately, it was famous for contemporary art, which is something I didn’t expect.
And this was what I saw:
What the fxxk is this?! Obviously I know this is a woman’s breast, well, a huge breast. But why it occurs here? Shouldn’t this place exhibit something related with art? Is this a piece of art? If I say yes, I regard myself as an idiot. If I say no, I guess someone else will say I’m a idiot. So I’m an idiot either way… Never mind.
What is art? What is beauty? Why these concepts differ among different people? I guess this is because people have different values, and value is something very complex. What do you think?
8 comments
Comments feed for this article
January 11, 2013 at 8:58 am
guozhang428
I agree. I’m always very confused about contemporary art. Can I post pics in comments? I really want to share some “confusing” art pics but seems I cannot post in comments…Also I feel that in modern society people tend to like the “low/vulgar culture”, and call them “the people’s art”(not even “folk art” or “folk culture”) because they feel happy and less stressful when appreciating such vulgar (sometimes dirty) “art”. Can we say the creator, the purpose, and the function (if any) of the product lead to the question “What’s art”?
January 11, 2013 at 9:51 pm
Katie O'Donnell
Attempts to define concepts of “art” or “beauty” have been made, but personally, I haven’t found one that *really* fits.
A group of us (under Jeff and Showen) looked at Etsy.com featured seller interviews* for a project. If you aren’t familiar with Etsy, it’s an online marketplace where people make things, have a shop, and sell what they’ve made. Etsy picks sellers they find particularly good/interesting and interviews them. Some of the interviews contained the question “When did you first want to become an artist?” The answers to these questions were so intriguing. Some people fell along the camp of “I’ve always been an artist” where as others say “Through my training and practice I became an artist. Other people didn’t want to be considered an artist at all and had some of the most interesting quotes. Here are some quotes we use on our paper**:
I think it is interesting to not only consider if an artifact is art or not, but also what the intention of the artifact maker was. Is this suppose to be art? craft? design? none of the above? all of the above?
How much depends on the maker and how much depends on the audience’s perception of an artifact?
I would also agree that contemporary art can be really confusing. Some of it is extremely cool and interesting, but a lot of it just leaves me puzzled.
* – http://www.etsy.com/blog/en/tags/featured-shop/
** – Coming to CSCW13! Check it out!
January 12, 2013 at 7:26 pm
raynezhou
That’s interesting. I was reading John Dewey’s words about aesthetic experience today, and he has some opinions about craftsmen and artists. He believes “love” is an important factor that makes one to be a real artist.
January 13, 2013 at 5:34 am
mengyao
Sometimes knowing about the stories behind a piece of works can help you to make sure whether it is a piece of arts or not. For example, for the photo you posted, if this breast is to represent motherhood, parenting, growing or something like that, I would think this is a piece of art. And if it represents the beauty of women, gender differences, I also think it is a piece of art. Apparently it’s just my personal judgement, and different people will have different standards. And it seems I’m utilizing the fourth approach: the social/cultural context.
January 13, 2013 at 8:55 am
slouraine
I think you have some good points. Along those lines, it’s also possible to look at it through perhaps a more feminist lens. By removing the breasts from the rest of the woman and making them enormous, perhaps the artist is trying to say this is the only important part of a woman. If that was the artist’s intentions, I would find it offensive.
It would be interesting to see what the artist said about this piece. I liked on page 12 of the Eaton reading, the quote: “We do expect critics to be able to give reasons in support of their evaluations.” Is there also some expectation that the artist should be able to defend their art? After all, sometimes people say “I guess art is whatever anybody says it is”.
Of course, we learn here that a designer should be expected to defend their design… is it possible, in any circumstances, that design is whatever anybody says it is?
January 13, 2013 at 12:30 pm
raynezhou
That’s interesting. I tried to find the name of this work, but I failed. All the creator provided is this sculpture. Maybe the artist just want everybody to guess his meaning.
January 13, 2013 at 12:17 pm
raynezhou
I agree with you. Understanding is a very important part for people. However, at the same time, I don’t really think that the viewers have the responsibility to understand everything behind the work. I was reading Dewey’s article last night. He said a piece of art work contains aesthetic properties if both the creator and the preceptors can capture and understand the going and undergoing of the work. Of course it is more difficult for preceptors to achieve this, as this work shows.
January 13, 2013 at 4:10 pm
jeffreybardzell
I am not familiar with the piece that Rayne has linked, so I have no special insight into this.
But one way to make sense of it might be to look at artistic representations of the body and sexuality.
As an example, consider Valie Export’s “Touch Cinema,” which is also a work that foregrounds breasts, but in a feminist context, both celebrating female sexuality and critiquing male representations of it (e.g, in this case, film).
http://bodytracks.org/2009/06/valie-export-tapp-und-tastkino-touch-cinema/
A much more recent example is “Hysterical Literature,” a series of YouTube videos in which a woman reads a favorite work of literature, while under the table (and off-camera) a vibrator is used to pleasure her.
So, when you put these three works together into a dialogue, it becomes much easier to interpret the first: rather than a weird WTF, it becomes one of many works of art that depicts and critiques representations of female sexuality.
Another strategy is to consider art history and criticism about sexuality, gender, the body, and the obscene. These will provide many examples and also expert interpretations of related works. Consider, for example, these:
Art and Sex
Art and Obscenity
Sexuality in Western Art (World of Art)
In this way, you can move steadily from WTF to an “understanding” in Barnard’s sense.