Page 1 of 1
art as intent
Posted: Wed May 25, 2022 7:10 am
by Advocate
An artist's interpretation of their work is neither an inherent or necessary attribute of art.
Re: art as intent
Posted: Wed May 25, 2022 6:39 pm
by Impenitent
perhaps, if there is no communicative purpose in art...
...
-Imp
Re: art as intent
Posted: Wed May 25, 2022 8:35 pm
by Walker
A trip to the Catskills in NY confirms the views that inspired Thomas Cole’s romantic/realism intent. Both artist and witness create meaning; style determines how much the artist and the witness each contribute to meaning. What each contributes, varies. Realistic art is more artist input than witness input, so more witnesses agree about the meaning, although a number of folks say that the realistic Martin Luther King Jr. statue in Washington DC looks like a Chinese man, which if true reveals either the artist's intent, or the artist's limitations. Modern art requires more witness input, so more witnesses disagree about the meaning of a modern art piece.
Re: art as intent
Posted: Thu May 26, 2022 1:05 am
by attofishpi
Advocate wrote: ↑Wed May 25, 2022 7:10 am
An artist's interpretation of their work is neither an inherent or necessary attribute of art.
It depends on whether the artist has an intentional purpose behind the art that he/she knows will not be comprehended without explanation.
For example:-
The art I present here was done with an intentional purpose in mind...:-
https://www.androcies.com/galleryscroll.php
...however, without detailed explanation formulated as per below, the viewer truly would have no comprehension of the intentional purpose of the art:-
viewtopic.php?t=33214