Friday, August 28, 2009

art v. design

My personal stance is that everything and anything can be art if someone so chooses to call it such. Something can begin or cease to be art at any moment in time. We discussed in class how art needs to have meaning and elicit a sort of emotional reaction. One of my favorite works of art to discuss in this manner is Fountain by Marcel Duchamp, which consists of a urinal signed "R. Mutt." The work is often classified as "found art" which is really nothing more than (you will forgive me for the oversimplification) a piece of junk to which someone has ascribed meaning. It is possible to ascribe meaning to anything. It is a matter of interpretation and perspective, and as we all have our own opinions, each individual is entitled to call art whatever one so chooses to call art. I feel it pertinent to note, however, that just because one might casually say "that is not art" does not necessarily mean that it is not art. A contradiction, perhaps, but it is my conviction that people most often say something is not art when they truly mean that it is a) bad art and/or b) not art that appeals to them. It is possible to dislike something while still acknowledging as such and such, in this case "art." Design, on the other hand, is more structured. There is less question whether something is art than whether something is designed. There is most often more universal purpose associated, such as engineers designing a bridge. Art can be design, but design is not always art.

caroline wong (t/th 2-:450p)

No comments:

Post a Comment