Symbolist Movement

Subsequent to the study of different philosophies of art, as well as completing projects asking for personal preference in art as well as objective “fine art,” a personal philosophy may, by necessity, include subjective and objective facets. In determining what fine art is, the quality of universality is important. There also does not have to be a traditional presentation of beauty for a work of art to be fine art. Contrary to R. G. Collingwood’s philosophy, for fine art the culture and setting in which art is created should not matter, because if art is universal and timeless, meaning endures outside of where and when it was created. Evaluation of art can be subjective, but fine art is universally appreciated regardless of understanding background,

This essay will focus on why and how conceptual artists sets out to destroy or undermine the value of physical pleasure in art's making and reception. In order to discuss this issue, first we need to look back on history to examine the historical context of Conceptual Art. During 1960s, the world is in a turbulent state experiencing all sorts of crises . After the World War One and the World War Two, the traditional value and institutional system had been overthrown. The collapse of old world politics, social order and authority, moreover, rise of Feminism, racial conflict between white and black, intervention of Vietnam War forced artists to challenge the conventional system and authority. In terms of technology, after the invention of photography, artists were not too much concern about lifelike representation. Picture, music, tape, neon lights...everything on earth can be vehicle of arts, which created infinite possibility of art making. Many conceptual artists are also influenced by philosopher from 20th century, such as Ludwig Wittgenstein, Walter Benjamin, Karl Barth, they raise the question of perceiving and representation. Conceptual art is also emerged, developed and influenced from other art movements such as Dada, Pop art and Minimal Art. Mary Anne stated in her article 'Conceptual Art' that 'Modernism had historically unfolded and artists began to work outside of painting frames...artists moved from morphological questions to questions about the production of meaning and value and what makes a particular object or practice into art'. It might not be easy to clearly define Conceptual Art because Conceptual Art could hardly be called a artistic style, in different period of its history, it has different critique approach...

Thus, it seems, the processes of appreciation and evaluation which lead to the conclusion that an object, whether a work of art or otherwise, is beautiful, are the same in all cases, and the paradigm for those processes must be that which is furnished by the appreciation and estimation of a natural beauty free of all intervention by concepts, whether the concept of art or any more specific concept.

Critical thinking is a very important aspect to understanding art. As David Perkins put it in “The Intelligent Eye”, we must avoid “experimental thinking”, a rash, quick way of thinking based on observations and use “reflective intelligence”, a way of thinking in which a viewer takes their time and dissects details and nuances to fully understand a work of art. A majority of viewers will look at a piece of art and come to a quick analysis of it, without much thought. But, according to Perkins, “The more attentive the observation is, the better the opportunity is for deeper learning” (Perkins 14). As Banksy said in Exit Through the Gift Shop, “the reaction to the work of art is the most important thing about it.” Without a reaction or an opinion, the work of art has no meaning. Therefore, in order to trul...

Bell, Clive. The Aesthetic Hypothesis. Aesthetics. Edited by Susan Feagin and Patrick Maynard. New York: Oxford University Press, 2010.

I am sure that we have all, at one time or another, noticed that almost any discussion concerning the merits and demerits of art, if it goes on long enough will come to the qualities of innovation and traditionalism in regards to aesthetic value. As soon as these two qualities are mentioned, there comes an inevitable forming up of those who favor innovation and deride tradition and those who favor tradition and deride innovation. Either side usually admits only enough merit to their opposition, and limitation of their own view, to make themselves seem reasonable and objective: but the bulk of their effort goes into savaging their opponents and extolling the ultimately ascendant nature of their position. I am inclined to take neither view, but to propose a third. It is not enough that we should pursue either innovation or traditionalism simply because we have some sort of aesthetic attraction to them, such as, for example, sentimentality or novelty. There may be those who would respond that there is simply no arguing about taste: that you like what you like and that is that. Certainly such people are right in one sense, but this response seems too simplistic and of a ‘sour grapes’ nature to convince me that this is the end of the matter. Rather, I suggest, it is the purpose to which we apply either innovation or traditionalism which dictates whether or not they have aesthetic merit: too often, our adherence to either of the two qualities becomes a thoughtless habit of our culture rather than anything useful in itself. In order to prove the viability of this qualification, I will first explore the negative and positive qualities of innovation, and the possible causes thereof. Then I will look at the negative and positive qual...

To the casual viewer, Modern art is often shocking, amusing, indecipherable and unnerving because art has always been understood in terms of traditional representation. However at the turn of the nineteenth century, European artists began to rebel against the institution of classical art. To gain success as an artist in Europe up until this time, acceptance by the Royal Academies of Art was essential (Rosenfeld 2000). The approved style was that of classical antiquity depicting idealised historical, mythological and religious scenes and because the Academies controlled official patronage for artists, they set the rules for standards of “beauty” in art (Rosenfeld 2000). However with the rise of modernity in the late nineteenth and early twentieth century, art theory evolved. Modernity in this period was characterised by rapid growth of industry and technology in the city, which meant substantial social and economic innovation across Europe. Feelings of anxiety and instability accompanied this rapid transformation (Sturken and Cartwright 2009, 449) and lead to a self-conscious awareness within artists and consumers alike. So strongly were the changes felt that artists began reinterpreting traditional subject matter to reflect this new modern age. Ultimately, Modern artists sought truth over beauty, a concept which encompassed both the physicality of painting as a medium as well as the artist’s sense of self in an endeavour to create “pure” art (Greenberg). Academic art strove to overcome the limitations of painting as a medium; surface flatness, canvas structure and properties of paint pigment (Kleiner 2009, 822), to create illusions of space and aesthetics. Modern artists reacted by emphasising the same properties to communicate original insights and observations. However, the popular notion that Modernism was a...

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder. Cliche as it may be, this maxim holds true throughout the world, whether it be in regards to celebrities, cars, rural lanscapes, gritty cityscapes, your co-worker’s children, or your father-in-law’s turkey carving skills. Holding differing points of view in regards to what is considered beauty is something that humanity has argued over for centuries. What one sees as merely a rundown subway car, another may see the small sparks of creativity in the walls’ grafitti, the colorful bursts of commuters’ clothing, the sheer beauty of humanity itself in the hidden spaces of the train. Discussions over what is truly beautiful are common throughout humanity’s history, though nowhere are they as obvious or as well documented as they are in the art world.

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.

If the claims of evolutionary science are justified (……), creating art may be related to instinctive drive rather than acts of fancy of human nature (Miller, 2000). Hence it is not surprising that we have endeavored at exploring art both through creation and contemplation from time immemorial. One integral part of art has always been considered to be aesthetics; the perception of visual field in relation to notions such as the beautiful, the ugly, the sublime, and even the comical (Read, 1931). There has been a general trend of exploring the subjective- philosophical, spiritual and socio-economic contexts influencing the perception and creation of art and aesthetics among varied cultural and individualistic paradigms. Alternatively, there is

In order correctly to define art, it is necessary, first of all, to cease to consider it as a means to pleasure and to consider it as one of the conditions of human life. Viewing it in this way we cannot fail to observe that art is one of the means of intercourse between man and man.

What is actually art ? There are theories made to define whether something art:Intentions of the arti...

Art is the creation of products (material or immaterial) consisting great aesthetic values can spread strong feelings to the viewers. Art can be enjoyed through senses and emotions, through skills and techniques far beyond the normal level. What is called art requires humanism, great moral values and high technical levels. One of the most fundamental and significant features of art is ideology. Art is ideological. This statement will be supported with the examples drawn from the lectures, tutorials and readings such as…..

The idea that esthetic perception is an affair for odd moments is one reason for the backwardness of the arts among us. The eye and the visual apparatus may be intact; the object may be physically there, the cathedral of Notre Dame, or Rembrandt's portrait of Hendrik Stoeffel. [...] But for lack of continuous interaction between the total organism and the objects, they are not perceived, certainly not esthetically [...] For to perceive, a beholder must create his own experience. And his creation must include relations comparable to those which the original producer underwent. [...] Without an act of recreation the object is not perceived as a work of art.“ (Dewey, 1958)