The very first question that the piece by Peggy Zeglin Brand asks is, "Can an ordinary viewer ever experience art - particularly politically charged, socially relevant art - in a neutral, detached, and objective way?" Addressing this, I think that the answer is no. Everyone has some sort of opinion or feeling about a certain subject and if it is addressed in an art piece, it would be hard to pull away from your personal feelings in order to just simply "enjoy" the art. For example, if someone considered the touchy subject of abortion to be totally negative, they might have a problem considering a piece of artwork that addresses the subject in a positive manner. Although it might be aesthetically pleasing to the eye, the political message within the piece and the viewer's particular feelings toward it would overshadow the look.
Brand discusses how some people believe that the correct approach to viewing art is to go into it with an attitude of disinterest. On the other hand, many feminist artist argue this typically masculine approach. They claim that art is suppose to arouse one's interest and evoke feelings, ultimately making the art a personal experience.
After showing the two sides of the debate, Brand comes to a conclusion that both sides are somewhat right about their approach. She says that by being disinterested, we are able to understand features of work but this does not stop us from returning to an interested mode of appreciation. I think that the way I would approach an artwork is to go into it without knowing the political message behind it. This way you could enjoy the visual aspect of the piece then determine what it is trying to say on your own. After doing so, you could actually hear what the real message is behind the piece and see if that has any effect on your opinion of the work.
Questions:
1. What do you think is the most efficient way to approach art?
2. Do some political messages overpower the actual artwork?
No comments:
Post a Comment