In 1953, Willem de Kooning, the most successful and inspirational artist of the abstract expressionist circle, was “challenged” by a young, little known artist who decided to erase a work of de Kooning to create an experimental form of art. This young, fearless artist is Robert Rauschenberg, who simply was “trying to figure out a way to bring drawing into the all whites.” Some say that “Erased de Kooning” is nothing more than a form of vandalism that holds no aesthetical elements that give delight to the viewers. On the contrary, others argue that the performing act of erasure allows the audience to feel the significance of conceptual component behind the work. The scandalous act of Rauschenberg, challenging the reigning master, Willem de Kooning, …show more content…
Fry claims that the audience would not be able to have the full experience that the creator has intended unless the audience knows the content behind the work. In addition, Binkley, an American philosopher, says that “[Erased de Kooning] is a work of art...It has freed itself of aesthetic parameters and sometimes creates directly with ideas unmediated by aesthetic qualities. An artwork is a piece: and a piece need not be an aesthetic object, or even an object at all” (Binkley 265). As Binkley states, it would be “inconsequential” and “a …show more content…
Without the inscription, one could hardly notice the aesthetics of this work and would define this work as indecipherable. Conceptual idea of “Erased de Kooning” is what makes it significant to some people. However, according to Bell, “content is a Distraction; the form and design is everything. Therefore, less content the better it is. Those who cannot master the form rely on the content.” Additionally, in order for someone to aesthetically judge a piece of work, “one must preserve complete indifference in this respect, in order to play the part of judge in matters of taste” (Kant 27). Thus, without knowing the concept of this work, one would not be able to find “aesthetical beauty” in few smudges. In order for a work to be judged as beautiful it must “, apart from a concept, pleases universally” (Kant 15) and should be “cognized as object of a necessary delight” (Kant 26). Bell also puts emphasis on criteria of “significant form” that consists of “lines and colors combined in a particular way, certain forms and relations of forms, stir [viewer’s] aesthetic emotions” (Bell 8) which can not be found in “Erased de
At the San Francisco Museum of Modern Art, the Rauschenberg art piece was definitely one form of art I once did not consider to be art. The artwork is not exactly a painting to me but certainly an illustration of something that is connected to real day to day objects. It was created by the artist Robert Rauschenberg in 1954. It is oil on canvas painting which is eighty by ninety six in size and the materials used are oil, paper, fabric and metal which are all on wood. It looks quite messy, with materials like newspapers, cut out fabrics, the colors’ drips and how they are splashed around. The image doesn’t look attractive but it sure does attract different ideas from the viewers on what the image itself is trying to portray.
Art is trapped in the cage of society, constantly being judged and interpreted regardless of the artist’s intent. There is no escaping it, however, there are ways to manage and manipulate the cage. Two such examples are Kandinsky 's Little Pleasures, and Marcel Duchamp’s Fountain. Both pieces were very controversial and judged for being so different in their time, but they also had very specific ways of handling the criticism and even used it to their advantage. We will be looking at the motivations for each artwork, what made the art so outrageous, and the public’s reaction to the pieces.
He clarifies his interpretation of aesthetic value, rejecting the traditionally narrow notions regarding beauty and composition, and expands his view to include insights and emotions expressed through the medium. Explaining that he views overall value as an all-things-considered judgement, he asserts the ethicist’s duty to contrast the aesthetic with the ethical and determine the extent to which one outweighs the other. Gaut calls on readers to defy the popular paradigm equating beauty with goodness and ugly with evil, allowing for great, yet flawed pieces of
Though most works of art have some underlying, deeper meaning attached to them, our first impression of their significance comes through our initial visual interpretation. When we first view a painting or a statue or other piece of art, we notice first the visual details – its size, its medium, its color, and its condition, for example – before we begin to ponder its greater significance. Indeed, these visual clues are just as important as any other interpretation or meaning of a work, for they allow us to understand just what that deeper meaning is. The expression on a statue’s face tells us the emotion and message that the artist is trying to convey. Its color, too, can provide clues: darker or lighter colors can play a role in how we judge a piece of art. The type of lines used in a piece can send different messages. A sculpture, for example, may have been carved with hard, rough lines or it may have been carved with smoother, more flowing lines that portray a kind of gentleness.
Imagine you can own one of the famous painting in the world. Which one would it be? What will you do with it? If I got to own a famous painting, I would hang it in my bedroom and I’ll show it to my family. In this situation, If needed to narrow it down it will be The Persistence of Memory by Salvador Dali or Nighthawks by Edward Hopper. These paintings are extremely different, and their artistic movement is opposite from one another. By the end of this essay, you’re going to know the differences and similarities of these paintings.
Turning what importance people used to value upside down, building a new possibility to what form of art people used to consider beautiful, Robert Rauschenberg is the actual author of this piece. Modifiying to a finished work of art, some may say, is wrong even with the artist's consent; however, Rauschenberg's modification serves to create this drawing a part of the American twentieth century cultural landscape (Fenner). If “that the drawing was erased is itself more culturally significant than the original drawing,” a modified art can express more accurately and so becomes acceptable. Insofar such acts of Rauschenberg have been regarded as “[reprising] the attempts of historical avant-gardists like Duchamp to negate the forms of traditional art,” Erased de Kooning can represent neo-conceptualism and Dadaism (Butt 138). Rauschenberg’s artwork not only speaks to reform the art-world that had been deeply influenced by traditional art form and practices, but also creates an effect of “anti-bourgeois and [has] political affinities with the radical left”
From the creation of art to its modern understanding, artists have strived to perform and perfect a photo realistic painting with the use of complex lines, blend of colors, and captivating subjects. This is not the case anymore due to the invention of the camera in 1827, since it will always be the ultimate form of realism. Due to this, artists had the opportunities to branch away from the classical formation of realism, and venture into new forms such as what is known today as modern art. In the examination of two well known artists, Pablo Picasso and Jackson Pollock, we can see that the artist doesn’t only intend for the painting to be just a painting, but more of a form of telling a scene through challenging thoughts, and expressing of the artists emotion in their creation.
The question of whether or not there can be a completely objective standard of artistic beauty is quite a controversial topic in contemporary popular opinion. In order to properly understand one's position on art, we may first need to clarify what it means for something to be considered art. Definitions of art have been numerous and, for the most part, unfruitful, yet I will provide a brief background on popular definitions of the course of time in order to provide a proper context for the definition of aesthetic value. The purpose of this essay is to determine the factors which make particular pieces of art beautiful and others not. I will analyse what I consider to be the two major components of aesthetic value, subjective sentiments and
Just as other works that reflect art, pieces in the category of fine arts serve the important message of passing certain messages or portraying a special feeling towards a particular person, function or activity. At times due to the nature of a particular work, it can become so valuable that its viewers cannot place a price on it. It is not the nature or texture of an art that qualifies it, but the appreciation by those who look at it (Lewis & Lewis, 2008).
Kant is saying, when you look at or read a piece of art you should have a sense a pleasure for it to be labeled beautiful. To him, beautiful art should bring positive images to your mind. Kant also states that beautiful art should bring a feeling of life (Kant, p270, 1963). Kant would read about Moses freeing the Israelites and have positive images come to mind. This is different from Schiller’s theory on the sublime because he feels that art should evoke feelings of pain and suffering.
Within David Hume's Standards of Taste we see the exploration of the idea that the level of beauty of how successful an artwork is relies entirely on the audience's personal response. By approaching this idea from many different viewpoints, although Hume focuses the primary point of his argument from the viewer’s perspective instead of the viewpoint of the meaning that is found when looking at the painting directly, basing his argument on the fact that, “though the principles of taste be universal, and nearly, if not entirely, the same in all men ; yet few are qualified to give judgement on any work of art, or establish their own sentiment as the standard of beauty.” This technique is one that is found to be used prominently throughout Hume's
The contrasts between depth and surface, figure and landscape, promiscuity and modesty, beauty and vulgarity all present themselves in de Kooning’s Woman and Bicycle. Although the figure is a seemingly normal woman out for an afternoon with her bike, she becomes so much more through the artist’s use of color, contrast, and composition. The exotic nature of woman presents itself in her direct stare and slick buxom breasts in spite of a nearly indiscernible figure. It is understood that, on the whole, de Kooning did not paint with a purpose in mind, but rather as an opportunity to create an experience, however, that does not go to say that there isn’t some meaning that can come of this work. Even Willem de Kooning once said that art is not everything that is in it, but what you can take out of it (Hess p.144).
(Büchler, P. and Harding, D, 1997). It is unfortunate that incidents like this occur, as restoring work is costly and in order to prevent destruction of the work happening again, art sometimes is shielded- which detracts from the idea of the artists original sense of freedom they had when producing their
David Hume’s essay “Of the Standard of Taste” addresses the problem of how objects are judged. Hume addresses three assumptions about how aesthetic value is determined. These assumptions are: all tastes are equal, some art is better than others, and aesthetic value of art is defined by a person’s taste(from lecture). However, Hume finds the three beliefs to be an “inconsistent triad”(from lecture) of assumptions. If all taste is equal but taste defines the aesthetic value, how can it be that some art is good and others bad? Wouldn’t all art be equal if all taste is equal? Hume does not believe all objects are equal in their beauty or greatness. He states that some art is meant to endure, “the beauties, which are naturally fitted to excite agreeable sentiment, immediately display their energy”.(text pg 259) So how will society discern what is agreeable and what is not? Hume proposes a set of true judges whose palates are so refined they can precisely define the aesthetic value of something.
If we were to ask a critic to critique a work of art, we would expect them to actually remember the contents of the work. Would we be satisfied with a critique that did not mention what the art was depicting, only detailing the quality of lines and ranges of color? I, personally, would expect one who sees true art in a visual to be able to depict the image the art is conveying and be able to interpret these images. When hearing others describe art in great detail, yes, it is expected that they recognize the form and function of the piece, but rarely do they completely disregard the main idea the visual is meant to communicate. This, again, is where Bell is false. I feel you cannot declare a piece of work art if you are only looking at the small details rather than the visual as a