I was really excited about my Philosophy and the Arts class, but now I feel more ambivalent towards the subject. Even throughout one class, I go back and forth from thinking that what we are discussing (namely, the question of how to define art) is really interesting and valuable, to thinking it is a pretentious waste of time. There is no answer. What is art? is a question that can't be successfully answered. And we talk on and on about it just to hear ourselves talk.
It is important to know what is art though, I think, so that we can know how to respond to an object. If you know you are looking at an artwork, you scrutinize it, search for its meaning, measure its beauty, which is different then say, if you were merely look at a chair. You just sit in the chair.
And I'm tired of reading about this.
Marcel Duchamp's Fountain. Duchamp bought a urinal, signed it "R.Mutt" and then put in a gallery, calling it art. It's valuable in that it forced everyone to rethink their definition of art. Is art art because the artist intends it to be? It is so because of its context within the "art world"? (Don't even get me started on the so-called "art world." I think the art world should be the whole world . . .) So it's interesting, it's just talked about a lot so I'm tired of it.
I really do enjoy the class, I'm just venting. I think mainly I'm frustrated with Philosophy students who like to hear themselves talk and who throw around names like Nietzche and Aristotle like they're candy. And then I have no idea what they are talking about.
It also feels good to complain, because then you get to feel above all the people you complain about. Which is probably why Jesus tells us to "Do everything without complaining or arguing . . ."
Speaking of me wanting the whole world to be the art world, recently I've been throwing the idea around in my mind of maybe someday teaching art in a high school setting. You know, spreading the good news of art. Art therapy is also intriguing, though I know nothing about it. Maybe that could be before or after teaching English in a Thai setting . . .?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
wow, reading this post was major deja vu for me!
I think I sat in that exact same class...
some people should have a limit on how many words they're allowed to speak in one class... like.. 12..
And I've also thought about being an art teacher, tho in elementary school. But most public schools don't have them anymore!
sad world..
Very interesting!
I wish I could say something profound here. . . but what is profound to one person is probably not to another. . .
Well, hmm ......... art IS interesting . . . and your post nailed that idea.
(I still think all the hoopla over the Mona LIsa is weird.)
This was such an interesting post, Laura. I went to a museum with an artist friend who was going crazy over a sculpture that to me looked like a blob of nothing. I mentioned my take on the object and ended my diatribe with, "Even I could have done THAT!" My friend smugly replied, "But you didn't -- and that's what makes this artist great."
To me, art is anything that evokes emotion, identification in some way, lets me see myself or the world from a fresh perspective -- even if I don't like that perspective.
However, a signed urinal is not art -- the signature is the only creative contribution from the visual artist. Again -- maybe I'm not impressed because I didn't think to do it, but to me, the real artist is the one who thought up and designed the urinal -- that took some imagination and creativity -- and THAT inventor called it a necessary convenience, not art. LOL!!!
PS -- Sorry about the deleted comments -- I posted this three times somehow..I need to eat or something...bl
I forgot to tell you, I like that quote underneath your blog title.
Did you get your contacts?
Post a Comment