Wednesday in class we discussed the very common idea that is presented in class almost every time, that art conveys emotions. It has been mentioned numerous numbers of times that art has the ability to arouse emotions of aesthetic value within the viewer or observer. It has been argued that if art does not do this, than one may even consider the work not to be art at all. However, we discussed in class an idea that is presented in works by Clive Bell; the idea that art presents a peculiar emotion. Bell is a fan of the artist style and interpretation known as Cubism, where basically all sense of realism is removed and the art becomes more of an visual interpretation of art instead of a realistic interpretation. This support for Cubism sheds light on the idea he believes that art exhibits a peculiar emotion. Bell states that the emotion is peculiar because it is hard for the observer to really understand the emotion they are observing and feeling. This is true of Cubism because commonly people are not really sure always exactly what the artist was trying to represent with their work.
Now a question arises, does Bell hold art that has a peculiar emotion attached to it in higher regard than art that is much easier to understand?
No comments:
Post a Comment