Response to "Analyzing Art."

Response #7

In Lisa's blog, she talks about how over analyzing pieces of art such as literature or paintings usually leads to less appreciation for the piece. In the end, the artistic value of the piece diminishes after analyzing it nonstop. Some may believe this only increases the appreciation for a piece of work but most get tired of it after discussing and thinking about it longer than necessary and to the point where it is no longer enjoyable. Thinking back to literature and art classes in the past, it seems true that reading into a book or looking past a paintings surface creates better insight into the thoughts of the artist. However, there is a line between analyzing a piece and analyzing it too much.

Then Lisa talks about abstract art and how modern art needs commentary since the observers are less likely to understand the meaning of the piece. Viewpoints become increasingly varied. Lisa asks the question, "Do you believe that modern art is becoming more and more abstract, and therefore harder to interpret, or are art-viewers just getting lazier at piecing together the meaning behind a painting?"

Art has greatly changed over time and I believe modern art is very abstract especially compared to past artworks. All artists have a purpose for creating their works and put some sort of emotions behind each piece. It seems as though modern art can be too abstract to understand the purpose of the piece. When looking at modern art, the observer will feel certain emotions but they will most likely vary compared to the emotions the next person feels. To fully understand the artists intentions, I do believe there must be more commentary to the piece. However, its no secret that our generation seems to be much lazier than past generations. Maybe having the artist explain his or her piece makes it less valuable as an art form. Observers should, in the end, think for themselves and having the artist narrator the piece defeats the purpose of individual interpretations. While I believe modern art is more abstract and there should be some more commentary than in the past, the observers still need to think for themselves when it comes to viewing and appreciating art.

My question to you is: Where is the line between modern/abstract art and random lines/colors on paper? Can anyone be an artist in our modern-day society?