Should I care about great art? Isn't it just as important that art bubble up wherever it can in whatever form it can for whatever purpose it proposes? We certainly measure athletics by level of accomplishment, entertainers by popularity and income generated. There are awards everywhere from Emmys to Nobel Prizes. For all kinds of noble and ignoble reasons, we like to identify and reward the best.
But criteria. That's the rub. Are criteria based on competition, popularity, dollars, peer judgement, quality? What?
I've been thinking about this lately and have some provisional thoughts in relation to visual art.
Art has the capacity to grab you in the gut. If this experience stays with you and moves into the mind and the spirit, if it just won't let go, this can be a sign of greatness, even if just for you.
A work or constellation of works by the same artist suggest enduring relevance.
A work of art takes you deeper into yourself over time.
A work of art gives you at least a hint of the sublime, a hint of the beauty and terror of reality.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment