What is Art?

One man’s trash may be another man’s treasure, but does this same rule apply to art? Among other things, art entices beauty through visual appeal, depth, technique and intent, and as no one person is guaranteed to see the same things as another, this can make it difficult to discern what is art, and what is not. Art is personal, but what separates the average man’s stick figure from world-renowned works comes from the artist’s intent and technique, ultimately leaving a lasting impression on its viewers, and my definition. Art: A creation that through technique and intent leaves a lasting impression on its viewers.

First of all, the artist must have intent, a vision, and not just a superficial vision, but one that strives to inspire viewers and prompt questions. This comes from inspiration, and the creator’s drive to create something more than just an “object”. The Piss Christ, for instance, prompted uproar due to its content. At first glance, the picture is visually appealing, but upon further evaluation, it would seem that Jesus Christ is engulfed in what would appear to be urine, prompting questions as to the intent of artist Andres Serrano. What was he trying to say by his depiction? Was it that he is associating religion, and the idea of Christ with urine? Or was it a pessimistic world view in that we are dishonoring Christ’s sacrifice, hence the urine? Without the creator’s own take own his creation, it would appear that both could be viable explanations to The Piss Christ, and the freedom to interpret is what art is all about. This is what ultimately sets works of art apart from pictures, ads, and etcetera. The Arby’s hat for instance proves this. Is the hat art? No. The hat is just a ploy, an advertisement, whose only purpose is to get as many people “thinking Arby’s” as possible. Just like the little red headed girl Wendy. You aren’t supposed to be analyzing the picture on a billboard; it is just common knowledge that it’s an advertisement. When pictures and images such as the Arby’s hat and Wendy’s Wendy have such obvious intent, the subjectivity is cast from the equation, and there is nothing left to interpret and appreciate, making it evident that neither are works of “art”. Depth of intent in artwork is necessary, and without it, all that is left is a hollow, meaningless picture.

In order to relay intent, the artist must enhance his or her product through technique. Symmetry, for instance, creates a visually appealing product, as does color choice, which also prompts viewers to question why it was done the way, it was. Artistry and experience makes it possible to bring ones vision to life. Through technique, the artist is able to create a product that is both impactful and meaningful to the viewers. The Sistine Chapel for instance inspires awe in its viewers through symmetry, color and imaging, creating one of the most famous works of art in the world. The mastery of the work is remarkable, drawing flocks of people to bask in, and appreciate Michelangelo’s creation, and because of his ability to relay a visually appealing product, Michelangelo clearly possessed the technique necessary to create “art”. On the other hand, some drawings or creations are the exact opposite, as in the artist lacks the ability to produce an acceptable product. The initial ideas for the creation could even be revolutionary, but without the ability to communicate them, they are useless, and unfortunately when it comes to the artist, the thought doesn’t count. If I wanted to say, draw a business man, but was only capable of drawing a stick figure, what would that make said stick figure? Or if I tried to depict a dark, ominous setting with vibrant, happy colors, how would it be viewed? There is a technique to creating art, in that ideas have to be conveyed effectively. Even classic American literature proves this. There is a reason that To Kill a Mockingbird is revered as a masterpiece, while many books don’t even make it to the shelves. In other words, just because you write a book, doesn’t mean that you have created a bestselling novel, and just because you draw doesn’t mean you’re an artist. To Kill a Mockingbird effectively paints a picture of a culture, conveying ideas and a different time in American History. Without the technical, writing ability to bring it to life, Harper Lee might not have been left with much more than a story. Instead she is left with an American Classic. Art is about having the technical ability to get your thoughts out there for the world to see, critique, and hopefully appreciate, and without this ability, the work as a whole, will be for nothing.

Finally, the “art” is presented to the audience. By doing so, the creation is put out in the world to be interpreted, appreciated, critiqued, or even scorned. Minds are opened and inspired, and not only by the art that can be found on display in museums. For the more romantic, nature can even be perceived as art. When one stands in the face of the awe-inspiring sights of nature, self-reflection and universal questioning typically follow. So that being said, sights such as the Grand Canyon or Niagara Falls should surely fall under the term “art”. Both of which meet the stated benchmarks of intent, technique, and reception. With regard to intent, the viewer is drawn to question how and why such spectacles came to be. How did nature manage such a creation? Some regard greater beings, theology, while others try to trace their origins through science, creating a level of subjectivity, and further showing that the “how?” and “why?” is left to the people. In essence, the intent is still unclear and subjective, but most importantly, the technique is unquestioned. If it weren’t for the visual appeal, the beauty of nature wouldn’t be renowned in the first place. Audiences travel far and wide to witness the many sights of the world first hand, clearly proving the visual appeal necessary to categorize works of nature as “art”, and with this, technique is evident. Through both intent and technique, these sights are ultimately brought to the audience, who as previously stated, depict their own interpretations and are in awe of the spectacle. Art is meant to be viewed and questioned, and without the audience, art would be nothing.

In the end, “art” is a very loose term that can be simply broken down into three main points, these being the artist’s intent and vision, the artist’s technique and execution, and the reception of the viewers. When all of these different aspects are achieved, the result can be priceless, and the final product etched into the hearts and history of the people. All of this made possible by “art”: what happens when intent meets technique, ultimately leading to a potentially timeless relationship with its viewers and the world around it.