Can art be only recognized by its context or are you able to identify it in any circumstance? I am asking you this because Paul from Austria, that comes often to my blog, raised this question last week quoting an experience that the Washington post made with the violinist Joshua Bell in the subway in Washington D.C.
You can read the story here.
I am looking forward to your opinion.
I think what was astonishing was how all those people that walked by Joshua Bell without even a care of what happened. I think it’s because, just as the Gene Weingarten, the journalist who wrote that article, said, people are too preoccupied and closed up to their surroundings. It’s just like praying, people can usually pray really personally to God when they’re in church, but at home, they don’t bother to take the time and open up to pray, because they are always preoccupied and never prepare themselves as they would in church.
On the other hand, what was even more amazing, and even though people often took it for granted, was that seven people actually stopped and listened to Joshua Bell, being deeply moved by his music. I think for each of the seven people who did that, they touched art, and even if it is only for three minutes, it’s an amazing thing. And it was too for Joshua Bell, I think. This was what he said, ” At a music hall, I’ll get upset if someone coughs or if someone’s cellphone goes off. But here, my expectations quickly diminished.I started to appreciate any acknowledgment, even a slight glance up. I was oddly grateful when someone threw in a dollar instead of change.”
And lastly, I realize that I can be just as creative as any of the great artists. Everything around me is a creative process, and if I am open to it - wham! I don’t want to miss a single second of life again.
[Reply]
The way i see it, the context of the art is of neutral importance.
I’d clarify further by explaining that art (a painting in this example) can be given credit for the liveliness of its colors, but if your switch these colors yet keep the colors in strict proportions so that the image can be absorbed in the same manner, then the context would not be as important.
Art is meant for the heart and soul before the brain.
[Reply]
What an interesting story, thanks for sharing.
Last year in uni we read the essay “Context as a determinant of photographic meaning” by J. A. Walker. He points out how eg. a wedding photograph can be represented in a family album, in a news paper, in the window of a photography studio, in a gallery, in an archive, etc… and how the meaning changes with each change of context. Context does not make art, but it gives it a meaning.
In the case of Joshua Bell busking in the metro station, people who could put the music in some sort of personal context, ie. could relate to it, also paid attention to it. But then so many people (adults) are distracted most of the day, so they (we) are incapable of paying attention to the exact moment that’s going on.
I agree with what many have said here, art is everywhere, if only we are open to see it.
[Reply]
Quando un paesaggio, una danza, un quadro, una scultura, una foto, un libro, una melodia, l’utilizzo della voce, un edificio, provocano un’emozione accumunabile all’amore.. questa è arte, che sia chiusa o meno in definizioni riconosciute.
[Reply]
art is a perception of the artist himself…it’s hard to put one definition of art…sometimes no one but the artist can understand his art,but sometimes art can be understood only by the observer…if a painting reaches our imagination or our feelings,sure it will have a value for us…on the other hand,without the context art can’t be definied…therefore,the context makes art complete.
[Reply]
That story is interesting. I think it illustrates why God established the nation of Israel: to give a context for Jesus. Without the context of the nation and its laws/leaders/prophecies, Jesus would have been like Joshua Bell standing on the street corner.
To me, this is another reason the bible proves far ahead of our understanding…
K.
[Reply]
Art is related by our eyes and our other senses.if a painting is alone with noone to see then it is not there at all.so art is a mixed phenomenon of observer and observed.a painting can have infinite meaning or no-meaning.when we observe a piece of art, we are other half of that,and both of us(painting and we)grow when in contact.
[Reply]
Penso che l’arte dipende dalla percezione che l’uomo ha di essa, come sosteneva Kant.I passanti non erano consapevoli di avere di fronte un grande esecutore,perciò non si sono soffermati sulla musica. Solo chi conosceva la musica classica ha capito di avere di fronte un artista. In compenso diversi bambini sono stati attratti da lui, pur non conoscendo la musica. Penso che dovremmo ri-imparare da loro ad intuire le cose belle intorno a noi, solo allora l’arte non avrà bisogno di un contesto.
[Reply]
Depends on a person’s mental state.
[Reply]
Impressive experiance. Thank you to the two Paul.
What a lesson of humility from that violonist!
Great demonstration.
[Reply]
I think that art is produced and realised by a lot of skill and imagination and thus the context in which it is placed is important as it can have different meanings and interpretations by the viewer itself. The viewer might interprete art differently in different contexts.
In everyday life where the context is the world or the universe, objects, actions or cordination of interaction of objects and people might create art but will be interpreted as regular motions or life.
To my opinion its a matter of how the messages want to be interpreted by the different viewers.
[Reply]
yes I think many people identify art only when in context.
and this experiment shows this even more: for many people art is art when it is paid for, like a good wine is a good wine only when the bottle costs over 20 euro, or has a certain name. some people are simply conditioned that way, and limit themselves unfortunately… ‘fear of the unknown’, or ‘follow the crowd’, I guess.
some can’t see the artist next to them… anybody can be artist in some way or another.
and yes art is everywhere, and it is all for free, if one is able to see, listen, feel…
…. and art is seen in a very personal perspective… some people just don’t like classical music, even if it’s Bell playing!
…. and some just think they MUST like it because it IS Bell (in a concert hall), they actually don’t listen much more to the music than the ones in the metro, it is only social make-up!
[Reply]
Dear mr. Coelho,
To me art is art no matter who has created it and no matter where i am when noticing it. I can’t help myself but get drawn into different worlds even when the moment is not very handy, so to speak.
When i walk a busy street in my hometown and hear the kind of music that pulls me straight out of ordinary life and into a different place..i sometimes hesitate to stop and listen for to long, only because i fear to get carried away to much. So i stop and listen…until i know it is time to go before i cry or want to dance.
Anyway…that is me.
However, as to the experiment with Joshua Bell ? I know a story of a famous philospher, this was years ago. He had a housekeeper mrs such and so. She took great care of him and his house. One day he had to attend a convention nearby. His housekeeper had agreed to be one of the caterers on that same convention,to help out a befriended caterer who was short on staf. She didn’t tell him about this, simply because she agreed to help out a friend and never thought of who would attent the convention.
That evening..while she presented a plate full of hors d’euvres to a couple of wise men that were talking…she saw her boss amongst them and greeted him. He just gazed at her and his face showed no recognition what so ever. She greeted him again and this time mentioned her name and occupation at his house. But still he didn’t recognize her allthough his face showed willingness. To his own surprise, so he told afterwards, he couldn’t recognize his own housekeeper because it was tó unthinkable for his mind to find his housekeeper at thát particular place and time.
Besides all this…i am an ( unknown ) artist myself and enjoy the moments in which i get lost in the background of my paintings, and dwell in thát place of my heart, or in the places óther artists take me to.
love,
Jennifer
[Reply]
…appreciation of beauty is prerogative of an unhurried mind - aditya
The fact that there was joy in the production should really be enough. - Arlene
* There is “Art” and then there is beauty.
* In my opinon, on the one hand ‘art’ is an abstraction that requires a context, and a marketplace.
* On the other hand, art is a thing well made, regardless of whether it is a ‘fine art’ or a practical art. A rug may be highly ‘artful’ and a painting merely an accessory.
* I performed as a modern\ballet dancer and it was not always the work itself that imparted meaning, but the performance itself. I have reviewed music and other performances and you have the workmanlike, you have the exhibtionistic, ego-driven dispalys and you have those performances that are the performers gift to the audience because it is from the heart and soul.
* Sign upon the door of the literary journal at UC Santa Barbara, circa 1965: You what to look at the way in which each thing is good. The way in is the way out.
* The artifact of ‘art’ is what is left over after the artist has acted. That is why performance art is so poignant… it was here for that moment and is now gone. If we have a moment to share that, we are enriched, to the extent that there is anything worthwhile to begin with in what the ‘artist’ has attempted. Well, you have to look at the way in which each thing is good… Anyway, after the artist is done with the act of creation, then it is in our hands to know what to do with it, what to think about it. And it, as well, depends on what the artist had in mind. Warhol? Van Gogh?? Pollack??? Or that artist whose name slips my mind just now, an abstract expressionist so famous for his series of paintings of women, luridly vibrant splashes of color in swirls depicting form and character who continued painting so well after he lost his mind to alzeheimers I think, or something like that… Or Dali, who signed fabrications of other people in his workshop…
* Ah, beauty on the other hand is a completely different matter and should not be confused in any context with art. Beauty in a breath, to be alive and aware… as aditya said: appreciation of beauty is prerogative of an unhurried mind
[Reply]
I was very happy to take part in this article, thank you! Now the question to ask first is in my opinion whether beauty equals art. I do not think so! There is ugly art that provokes and helps people re-evaluate their lives. However, I think beauty is inherent in life, it equals truth. Untruth, denial and deception cause ugliness unless this ugliness becomes intentional through the filter of an artist. I also think that people have more and more trouble being mindful about life, because of all the trivial obligations that we have been programmed to put our minds into. You have to clear your mind of preconceptions, theories and any other form of mind clutter in order to really look and hear. People are not educated to do this. The brain does get programmed into certain tracks very easily. Even I as an artist have to remind myself at times to be present to something really lovely, for instance the happiness of my cats when they come and want to spend time with me. I remind myself, that I may not get to see that beauty tomorrow, so I must not waste the moment. I am lucky to have time and education to do this, but how many people do? I think that to some extent context helps to wire people’s minds into appreciating art, because they know to expect it. They are then more able to de-clutter their minds and pay attention. I think it’s obvious that the beauty in L’Enfant Plaza was there whether anyone saw it or not. The reference to the koan about whether or not a tree makes a sound when it’s falling if there is no one there to hear it is interesting. The beauty was there in the reality as we know it, though maybe in a deeper ontological way it existed only to the extent that someone was able to pick it up. I just don’t think that sort of metaphysical viewpoint gets us anywhere. The reality is; stop running around making money like crazy and reconnect with what is truly essential in life! But it’s up to each and everyone to decide if they want to, of course… It’s a good thing that experiments like this help people realize they may have a choice in this regard.
[Reply]
By its context. Outside of its context or a small part of art can be misinterpreted. Or worse, not recongnized.
[Reply]
i am out of context and i am making art…I am in context and I still make art….
The great talented artmaking humans has a special gift and are more or less indepented of context when they make great art…
And some great artists have made great art with a great varity of context…
Art is art whatever perspective of context
[Reply]
2 days before christmas my father who has played the guitar and violin nearly his entire life and some of his friends did their yearly ’santa gig’. They dress up (quite badly) as santas and go to very very centre of Stockholm in Sweden and play Swedish christmas folk music. They don’t do it for money but just for enjoyment. It is so fun to watch them play as they look so happy and I think this alone is why so many people stay to watch them and they get thousands of kronor in only 2 hours. They do not work professionally as musicians but they have alot of fun!
I thought you might like to hear another version of this kind of story.. that every day people (even while busy doing christmas shopping) can still appreciate art outside the gallery - or however you say… :) maybe it depends on the country as well?
From Stina in Sweden
[Reply]
sir…
from where u get inspiration of being writer??????
[Reply]
Je pense que nous avons tous une parcelle d’art en nous, qui ne demande qu’à se développer: encore faut-il une préparation qui puisse éveiller les sens et la perception des choses…
Cela peut commencer avec le milieu familial, l’environnement, une démarche initiatique, pourquoi pas le travail… Certains ont même une pré-disposition aux arts…
Par ailleurs, je crois aussi qu’il peut y avoir un moment donné de la journée qui fera que l’on sera plus réceptif qu’à un autre moment… Il serait bon de refaire cette expérience au même endroit, mais à différentes heures de la journée: par exemple à l’heure du déjeuner, à la sortie du travail, etc… Les réactions et la perception de la musique seraient sans doute différents! de même avec des oeuvres musicales différentes…
Ecouter de la musique dans certaines circonstances permet parfois une élèvation de l’esprit, de l’âme certains diront, et peut amener à une perception trés affinée de l’environnement et des évènements éventuels qui y sont liés: par exemple écouter un morceau de musique au cours de l’enterrement d’un proche peut amener au seuil d’une sensibilité exacerbée et permettre de ressentir des choses que l’on aurait pas ressenties sans cette musique. A l’inverse, écouter un morceau de musique hurlant alors que l’on recherche un moment de détente peut conduire tout simplement à éteindre la radio!
Toutes les musiques ne conviennent pas à tous en toutes circonstances…
[Reply]
Art is something that you can relate to.
It comes from the source, deep inside you.
It can stir your emotions and move you to tears.
It is a connection.
It is love in its purest form.
It is unconditional.
[Reply]
Reading through the blog, I noticed some mistakes, sorry, but english is not my native language, so please find the corrected blog below:
Dear Paolo,
I think that art is everywhere and happens all seconds, in all moments of time and life, because life is context. The problem is, that our world is too calculated and alienated so that most people does not dream and did not remained children inside. We lost the ability to see the art in a “simple violinist in a subway station donating beautiful pictures and feelings through his music, the art of a waterfall, the art in seeing the colours of wet grass, when the sun starts to shine and the sunrise gives his tribute, the art in the way a mother kisses her child, the art in just going to sleep and waking up again in the morning, let’s say, the art in seeing the world and the life as “art”.
Everyone tries to be superman, or a supermodel; earning as much money as possible; trying to be someone in the structure and under pressure of the so called “important social adidutes”.
Faster, higher, longer, achieving to be independent, independent to the world. But forgetting the essentialities of the human being, that feelings should be cramped, even if they don’t keep you independent, but addicted to whatever, whenever, so that finally it keeps you to be addicted to walking on the path of life with open eyes… If we will lose this art, and it’s said to see how much this “virus” has effected all of us already, we will not only be independent but become Zombies of artificial contexts, losing everything, just living the life grey in grey, without colours, music, feelings, pictures, smells and all other faces of art.
I apologize if I drifted away a bit from the importance of a context in regards of art, but it’s nice that I had the opportunity to contribute some words to your blog.
Best regards
Gianni
[Reply]
You can appreciate art out of context if you allow yourself the time to do it. There have been many times i have walked past a street musician where, despite, being in a hurry I was compelled to stop and just listen, and take in the beauty of the moment. For me, good art doesn’t have to come from someone famous, it can come from anyone. We just have to open our hearts to it and allow us the time to hear it, see it, feel it and appreciate it.
ginaxx
[Reply]
Paulo, posso fazer um pedido?
Será que você poderia de alguma forma pedir para as pessoas criarem uma corrente mágica de orações ou algo do Genero, para acabar com o conflito entre Israel e Palestina?
Pode ser um Simples post pedindo uma oração para o fim do Conflito, o que for!
Por deus, mais de 700 mortos na faixa de gaza, as pessoas estão sofrendo!
Desculpe o tom desesperado,
Abraços grandes!
[Reply]
I think it really depends on mindset. If my perception is ego based then even if I do register the art I may not appreciate it. If my perception is spirit based I will definitely be aware of and be moved by beauty.
Love Julia xxx
[Reply]
In the movie Once, the man who plays music on the street saves his personal song for the middle of the night when no people are around. His playing attracts only one person, the woman who can help him bring his music to the world. Josh Bell had no need of the people passing to make a living. He was holding the same powerful space and playing the same amazing music as he would in the concert hall. How many people feel comfortable walking right up to that? Notice the people who do tune in stand far back to listen. Try the experiment again with lovely but unexceptional music and better than average playing by someone who is in need of an audience. That might fit into the world view of the subway station better. Or put Josh Bell there with a sign saying “free concert” which is more like what he was really offering.
[Reply]
The relevance of beauty can not be better explained.
Though meant to prove something els, the experiment done by The Washington Post clearly showed that the beauty of the master piece the finest musician was playing was not relevant. Though elegant, the perception of that master piece may had been distorted by what could have been one of many reasons, the setting in which the music was played, the volume of the music, the time being, etc.. All I’m trying to say is that it was not relevant to the pace or pattern of life of those people who passed by it and did not recognize it, Thank goodness we don’t have devices to record what was going through their heads at that time.
If this same study was made using a piano in a controlled environment playing a new or old ,uncommon, agreed upon as beautiful piece, in common terms “Uppie, or Catchie” I bet the outcome of the experiment would be different. The same applies if they had placed the finest artist in a fine park at dusk and had him play to gather the people around him.
I think perception is a fine term. And at its finest, it could alter our priorities. Which should be set with good taste.
[Reply]
I’ve posted in portuguese, now I do in English
“The art can be recognized in any case, since we are ready to capture it.”
http://poesiaemdegustacao.blogspot.com/
[Reply]
“A arte pode ser reconhecida em qualquer circunstância, desde que estejamos dispostos a captá-la”.
[Reply]
I’m a simple buddhist man, so I find all “art” beautiful….. all “contexts” interesting. Or you can just chalk me up with those of the opinion that art is “everywhere.”
[Reply]
Dear Paulo,
I am replying in the wrong spot - I was moved by your list of what is normal. Thank you for sharing this list; you speak the truth. I have spent 20 years locked in the public school system; last June a buy-out was offered and I took the money and ran. The mediocrity was not the fault of any particular person but for me, the system had too many rules, could not help but breed dumbness, and perpetuated boredom. I feel light and lucky - poorer financially but bright and full of ideas. Each day I can not believe everything that I have missed - the beauty of nature and the time to absorb. I am honoring the light inside my heart (thankfully, still burning) as I pursue my writing. The wonderful point about being over 55 is that I no longer dream about fame, instead I dream about learning, sharing, and understanding truth with hopes that my work can help someone. Your work has helped me gather strength to tell the truth; your list of “normal” is another example. Blessings, Susan McCoy, Milford, Michigan, USA
[Reply]
Art is a way of telling about our feelings in our souls. Art in context of poems or a book with words that reach our hearts is to love to ourselves and other humans araound us. A book written in love is making us calm and peacefull. True love
[Reply]
art is knowing how to fee !!!!!!!!
[Reply]
Perhaps art is not something which is to be defined as something meaningful within its own context, but rather within the context of the individual’s personal perceptions.
I think it is a shame that (as the article points out) some people do not seem to have the time to appreciate or be open minded towards some art forms. A lot of us live life at such an awfully fast pace, that we become entangled in a routine which prevents us from truly enjoying the more important things such as music, or other art forms.
Overall, I think art is BEST appreciated in context. However, it is not impossible to appreciate it outside of a context, and that all depends on the approach of the individual towards the art in question.
Having said that, I do not think that the experiment which was conducted by the Washington Post was entirely fair. In wanting to effectively gain results which proved the ignorance of us all towards art, they purposely chose a time for Joshua Bell to perform where even the most dedicated art lovers would find it hard to stop and listen…unless of course they wanted to be late for work. Therefore the results were obviously more likely to work to the article’s advantage.
Anyway!
Once again, context SEEMS to make art, but does not NEED to make art. I would like to think that I try to appreciate art anywhere and everywhere :)
Thanks for the debate topic, Paulo!
Love,
Elise xx
[Reply]
I am flattered that others enjoy my rather unorthodox style of writing…
Zero… ;)
♥ Paul x (a practicing non-conformist;)
[Reply]
Now I am thinking of the Chicken and the Egg, which comes first, once the egg is hatched, the moment is past or to come again in a different form….?
Art….. LOVE IT!
[Reply]
The artwork is in the artist’s context. Who the artist is as a person, how they have grown up, every circumstantial event in their life together with their genetics and their soul. All of these things have concluded to this humanbeing creating this piece of artwork, and a part of them is in their art.
When other people look at the artwork, they see the artwork in their own context. Sometimes, we won’t be able to relate to their art at all, perhaps because we can’t connect with the artist’s way of expression, or we’ve never felt the same kind of emotions of the artist. On the other hand, sometimes we can find a deep connection with the artwork. We love it because we can embrace and we can relate to it.
It’s true that one of the most beautiful things in life is when we can feel, understand and consolidate with someone else. But, equally as beautiful is when we can understand someone else despite their differences.
Art is made from one’s own context. It is seen from one’s own context.
[Reply]
Art appreciation is a “Moment”ary decision, it is not possible to reproduce the moment, therefore any piece of Art is unique to the senses of the beholder in a given moment, and even the beholder will not be able to authentically reproduce the experience…
I often wonder if I would be happier to rely entirely upon my senses and not having to recall a moment with electronic or other means…
Love, the moment, Paul
[Reply]
I believe everything we see is art.
It’s just a matter of looking.
:)
[Reply]
I find myself unable to comment on this.
a colorful garbage can may also be art for me.
[Reply]
Estimado Señor Coehlo,
Antes que nada muchas gracias por compartir su arte con el mundo, felicidades!
This was a very interesting experiment but I would’ve predicted pretty much the same outcome under the circumstances.
People are used to seeing street musicians and very few “hear” them, they have become invisible fixtures of urban life around the world. Considering the setting where Mr. Bell was placed, I’m not surprised that almost no one stopped to appreciate his art. People go about their daily businesses and don’t have the time or the attention span to do so; they walk by without paying attention, probably not even registering there is someone playing an instrument.
I come from a family of actors and musicians and we have many times stopped to listen to street musicians, sometimes because they’re good and others just out of solidarity.
We all know that art is very subjective, but I believe talent can be identified no matter the context or personal taste. It is obvious that in this experiment Mr. Bell’s talent did not receive its recognition because of the environment, a subway station.
He is not a “popular” artist and is hardly recognizable by the “common man”, it would’ve been different if they had put someone popularly known and recognizable, that alone would’ve called the attention of the transients and caused havoc. And please note that I’m saying someone popular and not necessarily talented.
The proof is that the ones that stopped and stayed to listen him play were a violinist and a lady that had seen him perform recently.
[Reply]
In the ideal world one should be able to recognize art in any circumstances. It doesn’t matter how we define an art - it’s personal. As long as one is Present in the moment , recognition should arise. In the real world scenario is different. Most of us live semi-unconscious, semi-asleep so we need context to help us navigate through out our surroundings. That’s why Joshua’s Bell’s performance is appreciated in orchestra hall versus Metra station. One need to be fully here, and now to realize preciuosness of the moment.
[Reply]
I believe art’s only true context is it itself, art tends not to have any function short of being something that stimulates human emotions, when a person is exposed to a piece of “art” it creates a peculiar alter reality governed by whatever relevance that can be taken from the audience of the work.
A lot of the time an artists work is interpreted in a completely different context by others than was originally intended, does that mean that art is no longer art? or has it become true art with it’s autonomy from any context except your own.
[Reply]
I don’t believe that all art has a context. Certain art is designed to only function within a specific context (i.e., installation art or Frank Lloyd Wright’s interior designs) but there is a great deal more art that can, for lack of a better term “take its show on the road.”
How do I know this? I am an artist, and I often work and sell my prints out of doors. My art and I are very comfortable there, but certainly once it has been purchased my art retires to another context that has little to do with the meadow in which it has been purchased.
The “context” comes into play in the minds of people. Most have their perceptions neatly pigeonholed: art belongs in galleries. Music belongs in concert halls unless it’s popular music, in which case it belongs on the radio or in football stadiums.
Art makes many people uncomfortable because it doesn’t stay in pigeonholes for very long. It squiggles out, drops itself right in front of pedestrians, making them listen or look or *think* or, worse *feel*. We live in a world where we’re not supposed to feel or show our feelings: art rattles our cages and makes us laugh or cry or think, “what the heck is he trying to prove?”.
Placing art in context is, for the most part, just another kind of pigeonholing. Art soars, and cannot be boxed or tied down.
Love,
Sophia
[Reply]
Art is simply wherever you can find it. Some people make better “treasure hunters” than others.
It doesn’t surprise me at all that the only people in the article who stopped to listen were fans of the violin/classical music. Musicians train themselves to truly hear sound in order to be good. They know which written pieces amount to more than notes on a line. It’s the same way with painters and such. In order to draw accurately, you have to be able to see things. It sounds silly, but it’s true. People whose perception is finely tuned can see real beauty.
When you can see things for how they are, that is art. Like the quote, “Art is the truth that tells a lie”. You don’t have to have the ability to reproduce it in order to appreciate it. That’s an over-simplified explanation, but those are my feelings on it.
[Reply]
No! context doesn´t make art.Art is art. that´s it, even though it sounds very absolute.We, people are too busy to listen, to admire, even to feel. we call ourselves humans, we pretend to be cultivated but we can’t even realize the real beauty. i know that beauty for each and every human is subjective.this music in the metro was extremely beautiful as far as i am concerned. anyway i guess that people are only concentrated to the things they may want, or need, forgetting everything else that they think is not essential for them. i think that life isn´t always about reaching your goal but enjoying all the way through, until you reach it. i think that art is everywhere, even though it´s hard to notice. every moment is full of art, the way things work is art! humans are art, we are a masterpiece that god created! maybe you will think that i am overreacting but that´s my opinion. bye!
[Reply]
Hi! you probably don’t know me because this is my first time posting a reply here. OK, back to business:
I think that art is viewed differently by everyone. If art is seen only in context by Alfred, it may be seen in another circumstance by Roger simply because he had a personal experiance where he saw absolute beauty at an awkward time and the art comes to life when he is reminded of that experiance.
For example, if a man, Bill, is in the middle of war and sees a beautiful tree on the battlefield, completely unaffected by the world around it, he may see a tree, 10 years later, that makes him relive the experiance.
[Reply]
If you are conscious, in the moment, I truly think yes- you also have to trust yourself, and then of course what is art……………..a bigger question
[Reply]
Art is like a set of facts or/and circumstances that evolve to a product.
By nature or by man…
Take the product out of its context the viewer is alone and are free to put what the viewer wants to put into it….freely
The new view(facts/circumstance) can evolve and maybe make new perspective…and new products….evolution is an art and its working…or what do you think?
[Reply]
Real Art is pure expression of Genius. It’s not context that decides what it is, or what is not art. All critics should know that.
Ascendent
Realistic
Travel
:) have fun
[Reply]