Media, materials, and the marketplace...three areas of interest from our most recent sessions as well as from chapter 3 in your text. We will be discussing different types of media in the art world as well as the great change in the use of types of materials. Like I have been saying since the beginning of this class, the marketplace and those people that are players within it, are integral to how "value" is placed on art works. We will look at people like Jeff Koons ,that seem to be all about creating a luxury product and playing up the concept of consumerism and we will also look at artists like Trenton Doyle Hancock, who make artwork that is about creating a personal mythology derived from his experiences as a child.
These days traditional disciplines in art overlap with theater, industry, advertising and more, resulting in new art forms and media. Today artists have the freedom to use any media they choose or create. Their choice can vary according to the idea or subject matter they wish to express in their work. It seems we have gone to extremes to illustrate certain ideas.
So, what I want to explore in this posting is the question...Which type of art is more valid in your mind...the art that is personal and created with fairly traditional materials or is it the art that is about much broader concepts and is created with materials that are not always considered to be part of the art world? Is there a happy medium between the two for you?
Before you begin thinking about this question, consider this big event that took place just this week in the art world... Artist Damian Hirst just sold almost 60 pieces of his work through Sotheby's, which is one of the biggest and most high end auction houses in the world, instead of using a gallery. His first two days of the auction netted 160 million dollars and there is still more than a hundred smaller pieces to be auctioned. Hirst is best known for his use of actual animals that are preserved and floating in giant tanks of formaldehyde. Click on the links built in to this post to find out more of this almost historic happening.After taking all this in, respond to the above question or one of the below.
How does the medium influence the way we perceive art, and the value we may give to a particular piece?
Why do artist today often use non-traditional materials to create their artworks?
If you were a very wealthy person who collected art, what type of art work would you invest in?...would you invest your money in tanks of dead animals?
The art that is personal and created with fairly traditional materials is more valid in my mind.
ReplyDeleteI think the art that is more personal with traditional materials holds more value in my mind, but i am open to any kind of "art". One thing is for sure i would not be paying high end money for an animal in a giant tank of formaldehyde. Gross =(
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteTraditionally constructed art and broader-concept/non-tradional material art are equally valid to me. I think mood and current frame of mind play a large role. All of us need to be conceptually challenged, but some times you want to view for the sake of viewing. It's like chosing between a movie that is enlightening, or chosing one with constant explosions. As for Hirst's shark, I think I'll stick to Sea World.
ReplyDeleteThat video was weird in class today. Thought everything the artist said was stupid. That's just my opinion.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
ReplyDeleteArt that is personal to someone else and was created to express things in their life and their perspectives are interesting but I can't connect with them and appreciate it like they do. It’s personal to them, not me. Broader concepts seem to attract and connect with me more.
ReplyDeleteI feel like the validity of the artwork has much to do with the audiences mindset. I personally tend to think art which is created with more traditional materials is easier to see as valid, although there could be a happy medium depending on the extent to which the artist strays from the traditional.
ReplyDeleteI like all kinds of art, but with the exception of Trenton who I've found out about today-the only art that ever spoke to me are comics, manga, and anime.
ReplyDeleteAaron Blair-
ReplyDeleteI think that the art that is created with much broader concepts and made by the "less traditional" of materials is more valid in my mind. After all, isn't that what art is all about, being creative? I think that the more traditional the materials and concepts, the less I am likely to consider it "art". We've already seen those traditional things being done, art is about doing something different.
I think any object can be interpreted into art in anyway you want it to. People are starting to use "less traditional" in my opionion to capture audiences attention to not so common things used in artwork.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWell if i was wealthy, i would invest in Art such as luxury Rugs that were hand crafted from rare fabric, things like expensive lamps,and things of the such. basically im interest in design, like the design of your home. i would buy things that fit my stlye, and it damn sure isn't tanks of dead animals.
ReplyDeleteArt comes in many forms...As the saying goes "DIFFERENT STROKES FOR DIFFERENT FOLKS". Keeping an open mind and trying to understand what the "artist" is saying or feeling or thinking in itself is an art. This bamboo swirling structure is very different but yet I enjoy it. How cool would it be to be drunk at night, next to this giant trippy artwork!
ReplyDeleteArt can be anything created by anyone. It only becomes art when someone realizes and looks more closer at the meaning of the structure the artist has created. I feel its easier to find the meaning if the art is more personalable and you are famililar with the mateials the artist used.
ReplyDeleteIf i was extremely wealthy i would by portraits like the mona lisa and the last supper. I would also get large murals with some extremely deep meaning to them. I am positive i would not want any tanks of dead animals. I would additionally invest in a portrait similar to the ceiling of the white house.
ReplyDeleteI think that if I had enough money to buy art, I would purchase older paintings of landscapes and locations, something I can look at and enjoy. Some of this newer, random colors and pieces of felt thrown on other pieces looks like a 5th grader made it. Just my opinion.
ReplyDeleteTyler Spaid:
ReplyDeleteIf I had enough money to buy art, I would buy anything that I like. Style, age, and medium are all important but the meaning a piece gives to me is what really matters. Would I invest in a tank of dead animals? I guess it depends what kind of animals.
i beleive that artist can be traditonal or non traditional but in my honest opinon i think some of the best art comes from work that isnt intenionally going to be seen, rather its things that you see when your walking down the street.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the art about much more broader concept is moe valid in my mind. I feel that when art is not just tranditional, people look at it more and it stands out to them. Art really depends on the person who is looking at it and interupting it because they are determining what they think it means, so everyones opinion is different.
ReplyDeleteI think that the art that is personal and created with fairly traditional materials is defiantly more considered art. I think that art like this can personally relate to a lot of different people who look at it other than a shark inside a tank. I think anyone who wants to can preserve animals and put it into a tank. The real art is being able to create something out of your mind and actually have a real meaning to it. I think artists today create these images that are so weird because they want to see how far they can push the envelope and see how many things they can make to be considered art. If i was wealthy i would surely buy somthing with meaning and actual value than buying a shark in a tank, but thats just my personal opinion.
ReplyDeleteIf I was a wealthy person the type of art I would invest in would be just simple portrait paitings or photos, nothing sculptured or anything because im more simple and like simple pieces of art. I probably wouldnt have a tank of dead animals because i dont think thats art and i think thats kind of weird.
ReplyDeleteI think that artists today use non-traditional materials to create thier artworks because it catches people's attention and it leaves room for people to interpret the art how they see it.
ReplyDeleteIf I was a very wealthy person the type of art I would invest in would be protraits and paintings, just anything that would catch my eye. And no, I most likely would not invest in tanks of dead animals.
ReplyDeletei think that the traditional materials use to make art are common accepted by the majority of the world, although when creating art from some material that isn't necessarily considered art leaves the object, painting, design, etc up for interpretation. i feel that this is what creates new genres/types of art. it may not be considered art now, but it could start a revolution in the art world.
ReplyDeleteI find this art to be very eye catching. While there is nothing amazing about this art to me personally to want it in my home I can see easily how someone could really enjoy this. I think many artists use non-traditonal materials to create their art work, bacuse our imagination keeps growing which in return we need some type of change in the ways to express ideas. Making art work of dead animals is something not many do..besides hunters...and it can intrigue many to want to buy soemthing so different from the norm. Overall this art work is modern and breaking barriers which seems to only be a never ending pattern in the art industry.
ReplyDeleteIf I were a wealthy art collector, I wouldn't invest in something like a animal floating in a vat. As creative as it is, I wouldn't be able to display something like that in my house or gallery. Also it wouldn't resonate me with me as a person on a emotional level, no matter how historical it is.
ReplyDeleteI think that artists often use non traditional materials because they want their piece of art to be different. If they always used the same traditional materials it may not be able to catch the mood that the artist is in.
ReplyDeleteI think that there is a medium between them for me, because everyone sees art differently, some see it as something personally created with traditional materials, but others see it as something different and off the wall with the non traditional materials.
ReplyDeleteBefore this class I believed that traditional art was more valid than pieces such as The Fountain. It was created with material that most would just see as something you pass by everyday. After discussing how there are many different forms of art in class, I have changed my perspective on art
ReplyDeleteFor me, I relate to art that is in the more traditional sense. There are traditional material artists who I don't feel move me or make me believe that their work is outstanding - i.e. Pablo Picasso and Thomas Kinkade. The reason for disliking Picasso's work is due to my own drawing/painting capabilities - I just feel the shapes, and misplacement of body parts etc.. is quite annoying. As for Kinkade, his art is beyond repetitive, duplicated by others, and is too commercialized. When looking at Mr. Hirst's work, it boggles my mind to know someone would spend thousands, if not millions of dollars for a dead animal thrown in a fish tank filled with formaldehyde. If I was a wealthy art collector, I would collect paintings in the traditional sense - not necessarily portraits, more of Van Goh, Monet, or even Degas - sculptures is a must, especially by my favorite artist Auguste Rodin (The Kiss!!). Jewelry is another art form that most people don't think of. I have an appreciation of it after having designed and handcrafted a lot of pieces, including my wedding rings. Ceramics is another one of my favorites, but the one thing I would love to buy most of all is a glass piece by Dale Chihuly!
ReplyDeleteI think that the art that is most valid to me is art that is made in traditional ways. Sometimes I feel like art that is made in non-traditional ways are simply to get reactions out of viewers and to try to prove that they are different and make different forms of art. I think, in some cases, that there is not alot of talent that goes into non-traditional art, such as the tanks of dead animals. There is no way that I would invest my money in this if I was a collector; however I know I have a bias opinion because I am not a fan of contemporary art, I like traditional art like Van Gogh and Monet.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteMany people will judge art depending on the medium. Everyone wants to best and by using certain mediums, the best art can be created giving more value to a piece. Artists today are using non traditional more because they put more emotion and more of themselves into these pieces making them rare and original. I would be more willing to buy a piece that caught my eye because of its rarity than something that is common. Being different is valued in todays culture and arts no different. If i was very wealthy, i would invest in creative, yet random, sculptures because those are what catch my eye most. I am more amazed when pieces of nothing are taken and turned into some form of art and beauty. I dont think i would invest my money in tanks of dead animals because to me that isnt art, that's just weird.
ReplyDeleteart that is more valid in my mind is art that truly comes from a person's own ideas and opinions and not from what someone else has previously done. therefore, i think that non-traditional mediums are more valuable because they are used to think outside the box and to be something totally new that someone came up with all on their own, from their own perspective. If i was wealthy i would purchase the art that i thought had a brand new idea behind it. However, it would also have to be respectable, something that took talent. I wouldn't buy the tanks of dead animals, unless i could see past the absurdity and understand what it really meant. and honestly i feel like i wouldn't be able to do that.
ReplyDeleteI think there is so many different kinds of art. I do not just think of art as being a piece of work, but I think dancing is an art and alot of other things. You can express your feelings through a paint brush and a canvas or through dancing. I think dance is as much of an "art" as a painting or model.
ReplyDeleteGenerally, the art that is personal and created with traditional materials is what is more valid in my mind. Every now and then the broader concepts to me can be valid, but for the most part more traditional the more the real it is.
ReplyDeleteThe medium can influence art in many ways. Most of the time when one has a painting it is considered art, but on the other hand is something came from the computer, it is not art in everyone's eyes. To some the more traditional art has more value. But in the end it depends on the person and the function they have for their piece of art.
I believe artists now use non-traditional materials to create their artworks because they want to try something new and be original. Instead of doing what everyone else did, they like to think out of the box, which is typical for artists. And by using non-traditional materials they could possibly start a fad that could live on.
If I were a wealthy person who collected art I would invest in mostly in paintings & sculptures. Many paintings can mean many different things to people, and sculptures to me are cool and unique. But bottom line is that I would not spend my money on tanks of dead animals.
I think anything that is create by a person to express themselves is art, and is valid. Anything from dance and music, to comics and anime. Although I do not think that using found objects is a valid form of art. To me, picking up a random cup you found and calling it art, just sounds weird. But that's just my opinion.
ReplyDeleteIf I were wealthy I would buy traditional painting because they always have a much deeper meaning behind them as opposed to newer art that was made because someone was bored.
ReplyDeleteEven if I was wealthy, I couldn't see myself spending much money on art. The only thing I could possibly see myself buying is something that will last for ages. What good is art if it only survives long enough for one generation to enjoy it?
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI like both types. I like art that catches my eye. Does't matter how it was made or what it was made with. If I was wealthy, I would invest in art work from Andy Warhol. I've been to the museum a few times and I just really enjoy his work. I would'nt mind having something by him. Liking art just depends on your own style.
ReplyDeletethe art that is personal and created with fairly traditional materials is more appealing to me. It takes creativity and a certain set of skills to create. there is a happy medium, but the urinal that sold for 4m $$ is on the far end of that
ReplyDeleteI believe that the most valid art is that which uses traditional materials. But i do still think that some of the modern art that uses any materials can be art. It all depends on how the specific piece makes you feel.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIm not bias towards any type of art by any means. I do however prefer to view tradtional art. alot of times i find looking at paintings or drawings more appealing than looking at dead animals in jars. But i do try to look at all art with an open mind to see what meaning the artist had in mind or to even create my own meaning if i can.
ReplyDeleteIf I was a wealthy person, I would invest my money in classical art. When I say classical art I am referring to art that is recognizable and was created by famous artists. Maybe it is their fame that has my interest or it is the history and stories behind the pieces.
ReplyDeleteI think artists today use non-traditional methods because they want to be different or unique or because the want to try to push the envelope. Often times it just looks like shit though.
ReplyDeleteArt made with traditional materials is more valid in my mind. For example, I can't grasp the ideas and messages, if there's any at all, of Damian Hirst's piece "The Kingdom". Placing a dead shark in a large vat of formaldehyde does not captivate me at all and I'm shocked that it sold for so much. On the other hand, viewing a creative and original painting is a much more spectacular feeling.
ReplyDeleteTraditional art is something that has more value to me and I would rather spend more money on traditional art rather than dead animals. What Hirst is doing just seems absoultly disgusting to me and I can't even imagine people paying so much for somthing so gross.
ReplyDeleteI am more interested in traditional art personally. I find it more relatable and i understand it more. I can appreciate the idea of broader concepts and different materials, i find the exhibit with the animals interesting but i am more inclined to enjoy traditional art.
ReplyDeleteI personally favor the art that is about much broader concepts and is created with materials that are not always considered to be part of the art world. I think it is a new way to look at things, some we see every day.
ReplyDeleteI like the art that is personal and created with fairly traditional materials because it is more conventional. It just seems easier to understand and relate to.
ReplyDeleteI think that the best kind of art is a mix between the two. I feel it should always be personal, but it can be equally as meaningful whether it uses traditional materials or not. Artists today use non traditional materials either to stand out, or because those materials are what they feel expresses them. If I was rich I would invest my money in pretty paintings and sculptures.
ReplyDeleteSome forshadowing... I'm curiously waiting to see how the student body responds to the large wooden sculpture (Hisham Youssef's) that is going into the Oak Grove. What will the passer-bys say? I'm guessing a lot of the student body will be in shock of "The large wooden thing." Would it make any difference if it were made of steel, aluminum, cast iron, etc? Would people view it differently if it were metal? Are we inundated to believe that large sculpture displayed outdoor has to be metallic in nature? Thoughts??? Anyone???
ReplyDeleteThe value of art is dependent upon either the personal appraisal of the art,or the artist. Some people like the abstract art since it symbolizes uniqueness and rarity more so than the art that expresses traditional follows. More intricate pieces of art are harder to duplicate than the simple ones. Hence why stick-figure paints typically do not sell for an amount to be headline-breaking-news. Artists will often use non-traditional materials to create works for the uniqueness aspect. Generally, people do not want to be plain. They want one thing that no one else has. If an artist, with a reputable reputation, makes only one painting, one statute, or one piece of artwork then it will sell for more than mass produced artwork because a costumer will want to be the only individual to own that piece whether it means something to them or not. Meanings for arts vary from artist to observer and can be forcefully conjured.
ReplyDeleteArt that is personal and constructed with traditional materials seems more valid. I think that art should allow for others interpretations, however it shouldn't be so stange and "out there" that one cannot even form an opion. For me if i'm not instantly attracted to a pieces color, shape, or meaning than I do not consider it true art.
ReplyDeletetraditional art is what comes to mind when i think of "art". but that is just my opinion. art can be whatever a person thinks is art. if i was rich, i think i would invest more in paintings and sculptures. i really enjoy glass artwork. and i am pretty sure i would not invest any of my money in dead animals. i think its sorta neat, but kinda creepy. =/
ReplyDeleteTo answer the question posted about what is more valuable, I would say to say that the materials that are more personal and traditional mean more. Art is a way to express one's self and I feel that the more raw it is or portrayed gets others to really feel how the artist is. Also, using traditional materials helps to see where the artist comes from or where he was when making a piece of art.
ReplyDeleteWell, I consider taxidermy a great form of art, and it is just dead animals.
ReplyDeleteI persomally think that art can be everything and anything around you. Art is the way that you look at things, and how you feel about them. Its a way of expression. Everyone looks at art in different ways and thats an okay thing.
ReplyDeleteThere seems to be a happy medium in the validity between the two methods of art. The validity of art to me is dependent on the depth of the indivdual piece that may be made of many different things based on many different concepts.
ReplyDeleteArt that is personal to someone else and was created to express how they feel can never really hit the viewer as hard as a peice that has a universal meaning. Like take two hands shaking. I feel that everyone piece is in the eye of the beholder.
ReplyDeleteI think that artist's today turn to non-traditional materials because they are trying to create their own style and be different. Different artists like to work with different materials. If every artist used traditional materials no new styles of art would come out.
ReplyDeleteWith so many different materials available to artists in recent times, it is not unusal that they are more inclined to utilize them. Where as before people had to travel for the materials they may want to use now it is possible to just order them off the internet. Yes, the materials are an expression of what the artist has to say, but also some of it may be contributed to the shock factor, and the fact that these things are available to them now and weren't in previous times
ReplyDeleteart is an expression that artist show in their own unique way,but personally i was never able to understand it but im still interested and willing to get its concept.
ReplyDeleteIf I were a wealthy person, I would collect or buy art that caught my eye and made me think. In order me to buy it I would have to purchase it, I think that it would have to really speak to me and remind me of something. It could remind of a great experience. The art could also say something that I believe, maybe a religious, political or social statement. The art could also just be unbelievably beautiful.
ReplyDeleteArt is more personal and it describes what type of person you are.
ReplyDeleteI agree with you Chelsea. I think because art is so personal the interpretation of each piece of art varies from person to person. In my mind if I were wealthy enough to be a collector I would purchase pieces that would reflect the type of person I am. In some crazy sense if that meant buying tanks of dead animals, then so be it.
ReplyDeleteI am a very nontraditional person, so the art that uses ordinary, regular items that are found and is kinda crazy, is the art I like. Art to me reflects a person and their personality/beliefs/opionions and should not have a definition placed on it. I agree with Gabby when she says that if she had enough money to buy art, she would purchase pieces that reflect who she is. That's how I am as well.
ReplyDeleteIn my personal opinion, I believe Art is both personal and created with fairly tradtional materials, as well as it is about much broader concepts and created with materials not common to the Art world. As we discussed in class, Art is not definable and along those words, I believe Art is not just one of those two ideas, but a mixture of both. Now I know, not everyone will agree with this, but I believe everything is different from each and every person's own perspective so Art can be or have a different meaning from person to person.
ReplyDeleteThis piece of art is very modern and a lot of fun. There is art everywhere. On the mans face, on the walls, the animals, etc.
ReplyDeleteif i was an art collector i would collect dead animals from all over the world because im interested in animals and enjoy peoples reactions to seeing them stuffed. Also i would like to see how many different kinds of animals i could get.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThe art that is more valid to me is the more traditional kind. Althoght, I can see why other people might like the more modern types it's just not my style. If I was a wealthy person that could afford expense pieces of art they would be from Monet or Van Gogh. When I look at these panitings they have an understood beauty that I love.
ReplyDeleteThe more traditional kind of art I find to be more valid. I always found such pieces of art to be more influential and more thought provoking as opposed to those made of other materials. I agree with the above statement, that if I were a wealthy person I would want pieces by well known painters.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIn my mind, all art is valid. I like all art but i do not think i would spend high amounts of money on a tank of dead animals because that is just gross. But if i did have the money, I would probably buy paintings and that cool bench that was at the art exibit. I thought that was a very intresting piece of art.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteI think artists today use more non-traditional materials because they want to change the way we look at art, just as many artists have done before. We have used the same materials for art repeatedly for so many years, that they are experimenting with new things and new materials.
ReplyDeleteIf I were a very wealthy person who collected art I wouldn't be interested in one specific type of art work. I would invest in anything that caught my eye and seemed appealing to me. If it was creative, interesting and meant something to me I would invest in it. As far as the dead animals inside of tanks, the idea just doesn't feel comfortable and i don't think it would be a personal collection of mine.
ReplyDeleteNow I have a question: Do you think cartoons, comics, manga and anime be considered art? I mean it seems comics onced had revelance to society upon morals, politics, etc. Also I remember Hef the creator of Playboy Mag. considers his photos within the mag. as art. Would you agree? He also deemed his mag more a political view also within the articles.. I wouldn't know even though I use to subscribe. I'm more of an anime fan myself. My favorite is Bleach.
ReplyDeleteI feel that artists today use non-traditional materials to create their art work because they try to be unique. Just like the artist Damian Hirst. I never even heard of using actual animals that are preserved and floating in giant tanks of formaldehyde to become art. But to him, in his unique ways that's art. I also think that they try to make their pieces better than the day before because fads are constantly changing.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteIf I were wealthy and collected art, I don't think I'd exactly invest in one type of art work, I think I'd invest in anything that was appealing to me, or just caught my eye. If i like the piece I'd invest in it, that way my collection would also probably have a wide range in variety, since I tend to like many different things. i think that this medium goes outside of the box, and doesn't exactly fit the way that we see art, because most people think of art as it is when its on a flat canvas, such as a painting. I also think artist today use non-traditional materials because they want to be different, and stand out so they are more likely to be found appealing by others.
ReplyDeleteI feel that there has to be a medium between traditonal types of media and the newer non-traditional ways. What one person considers art, another may not. Somebody might love comic books but a traditional artist from past times might not know what to think about them. Artists need to change the ways they do their art to be different and original. Alot of times being original means changing the way you do things. I feel that old timers might not find new forms of media to be legitimate, but todays artists can respect both the past and present forms of media.
ReplyDeleteIf i was wealthy i would invest in paintings and sculptures because they are one off, and express the artist ideas and thoughts. They can be personal if they express a feeling or thought you had. I feel like nontradional art is popular because it can be interpreted in so many ways. I feel like there is a happy medium inbetween nontraditional and traditonal.
ReplyDeleteI think that art can be described as anything that you have interest in or something that you find valueable and interesting to look at. Personally if I was wealthy and could invest in buying a piece of art i would deffinately not consider dead animals as a piece of art because that is not my general interest, rather i would love to go to different countries and buy different artifacts that are important and symbolic to the people of that culture. Ex. African tribal masks. I love to be surrounded by diverse artifacts, and that would my idea of a perfect art selection.
ReplyDeleteThe medium changes the way we perceive art. Traditional paintings usually hold a higher monetary value because of their traditional medium. However, this medium seems boring to many new age artists. They want to spice up the art world, which is why they use non-tranditional materials. If i was really rich i would invest my money in art work like paintings and sculptures because i like the classic elegance they portray. I wouldn't invest in tanks of dead animals. that's just gross!
ReplyDeleteI think that the medium definitely matters in the way we see art. People usually tend to look down on craft like art, while paintings are higher regarded. I think that modern artists use new and different materials so that they can attempt to do something that hasn't been done before. If I could afford it I'd buy classic paintings, I tend to find them more attractive.
ReplyDeleteif i was personally a very wealthy art collector, i would probably tend to go after pieces that were recognizable. while most of these are probably in museums or private galleries somewhere, i would try to get works with famous creators, not art that some current no-name came up with.
ReplyDeleteI would say that there is definatlly a happy medium between the two it is what the art means to the person not what materials it is made of the medium is just the catalyst.
ReplyDeleteBeth Ann Brinley said...
ReplyDeleteIf I was a wealthy person I would invest my money into paintings and sculpture pieces. These pieces would have to incorporate a lot of color and that would catch my eye when I first saw it. I am more into the art that is a creative piece and not just a painting of a picture or event. It has to have that "WOW" feeling to it. And no I would not invest my money into buying tanks of dead animals.
Art comes from peoples creativity. Art is not defined. Art comes from peoples emotions. Art is sheer beauty. However art can be ugly. Art is everything and anything.
ReplyDeleteI feel that art that is more personal has more of a meaning to too it because it allows people to have different verdicts about it.
ReplyDeleteI think artists use new materials so they can find new dimensions in the creation of art
ReplyDeleteIf I was wealthy and collected art, I would not collect dead animals, I think I would collect paintings and drawings the most.Something I could hang on the walls of my million dollar home. The modern "art" such as dead animals doesn't interest me at all.
ReplyDeleteFor me there is a happy medium between what is thought of as traditional art and more modern art, i like the more modern art because to me is usally more thought provoking.
ReplyDeleteI think that the medium has alot to do with the vaule of a piece, that sometimes different medium mean more to different people.
Artist now use non-traditional materials because they are more readily aviable and more are widely accepted as art than they were before.
i love animals, but i don't think that if i was wealthy i would invest in tanks of dead ones, i much prefer the live ones.
Art is anything you want it to be. A person could literally stack up used tissues and call it art. It does not matter what material you use, so long as the work of art has a personal meaning to you. I think artists choose to use non-traditional materials, to show how creative they can be.
ReplyDeleteWhen it comes to artwork there are no specific guidlines I would follow in what I would buy for my home. I like things that are meant to be pretty and at the same time I like things that serve as a scary jult to your mind. The main thing that makes art enjoyable to me is what meaning I can get from it anything that looks like the artist was jus nuts and decided that they wanted to have colors do a dance or something just irritates me but if the artist makes you mind wonder and imagine incredible things than I love it.
ReplyDeleteWhile I personally believe that anything can be art, the statement is still said loosely. Artists now are just pushing boundaries and creating in my opinion horrible pieces of art. I believe artists today need to take a step back and basically think about what they are making before just turning a toilet on its side and calling it art. I think its just getting silly and is making a joke of more conventional artists.
ReplyDeleteIf I was a wealthy person, I would buy art that was personal to the artist and was appealing to my eye. To the artist their work is very personal to them and I respect that, but if it looks like a little kid did it then I wouldn't want to buy it.
ReplyDeleteI feel that artists use more non traditional materials to create their artworks today to add more personal meaning to their works and make it their own. If they use the same materials as everybody else and create similar types of art work, there is no individuality.
ReplyDeleteI believe the medium an artist uses plays a big part in the way we perceive it and feel about it. Of course, weird mediums are going to get a lot of attention like a urinal. But I personally like artwork done in watercolor...so naturally i'm going to like and be drawn to those types of artworks. I definitely think artists use different mediums to get attention and get a different reaction. I personally wouldn't buy dead animals.
ReplyDeleteI feel that artists nowadays tend to use less-traditional materials to create their pieces. In my opinion they do this because its a way of catching people's attention and sparking their interests.
ReplyDelete