English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

How many people here have taken an art appreciation course (you know, the ones where you study impressionism, pointilism, dadaism etc. And of course classical greek, renaissance etc.)? And do you think most people should learn about it? And why or why not?

2006-07-10 09:17:21 · 7 answers · asked by ATerribleIdea 5 in Arts & Humanities Visual Arts Painting

Thanks everyone for answering! I wish there was a way to infuse an appreciation of art into daily life. I understand that everyone has different and busy lives... but I can only see how appreciation of beauty through art could only enhance people's living experience.

(Maybe it can even soothe the stressed, give the lonely a connection to humanity, provide an outlet for the enraged, and open minds...)

hmmm...

2006-07-17 06:08:39 · update #1

7 answers

I have not taken but I am interested so I have read by myself. But I have taken Antient Culture :) And i find all these things very interesting :)

2006-07-10 09:22:15 · answer #1 · answered by Maria 2 · 0 0

This is my favorite question since I am a visual artist and I teach photography. Most art appreciation courses are right up there with basket weaving and god knows what else. They are usually taken by students who need a credit in the humanities and/or senior citizens who have time on their hands.

Occasionally, there are actually serious art students who are interested in the work beyond trying to figure out how they can get rich and famous as artists.

The people who are actually interested in art are the ones I cherish. Those who will delve into a piece for the meaning and the motives that the artists had. But, unfortunately, they are a very small minority. To most, all that stuff is pretty much disposable.

In my photography teaching, I try to stress how important it is to study classical painting, because that's where a photographer learns about light. I try to tell students to view the works of Vermeer, Rembrandt, Turner, etc. In the hopes that they will realize that art is, in fact, timeless and has universal applications.

Everything we have now can be traced back to the classical period. I hope it's not lost in the mad race for riches and material wealth.

2006-07-10 09:39:39 · answer #2 · answered by brian k 3 · 0 0

I study Art History and I think this question creates a dichotomy. On the one hand I experience the value of being able to interpret a work of art and find my knowledge gratifying and stimulating. I often wish that I could discuss my findings with friends for instance and their lack of knowledge in this field limits the conversation somewhat. This is the point I reach when I begin to think about the inclusion of Art History within the curriculum. Now we get to the difficult part. Their is a vast difference between someone who has taken an art appreciation course and a serious student of the discipline. Yes people should know about the different genres and a few technical terms so that they can get by, but I fail to see how there is time to spare in the National Curriculum for students to pursue the subject any further than an introductory level. The background knowledge required alone for this kind of study is in itself a feat to achieve. Let those who wish to appreciate a little art do so to the best of their abilities and let those who wish to remain ignorant do as they please.

2006-07-10 12:43:51 · answer #3 · answered by samanthajanecaroline 6 · 0 0

Art is who we are to the depth of our souls. Our schools and culture at this point in time values football over art.. I think everyone should have a reasonable art education and mover encouragement for new artists. Being a good artist is more important than being able to knock someones brains out on the football field. And I have yet to see 5,000 people turn up to see a local art exhibit. And I don't see the review for them on the front page of the newspaper.

What do we study in ancient history all the way back to the cave.? ..ART ! And we only know of their sports because it was illustrated in their art.
The art left behind tells us the life story of that people, their thoughts and desire and their respect for each other.

When our culture is dead and gone, what will the future have to study"? plastic disc! our old sports uniforms will have rotten away.

At our local schools the art program consists of one teacher traveling the system giving one art class every 6 to 9 weeks at each school in a class room not designed for art.
Art is what makes us human and our humanity is being stripped away.

2006-07-17 05:35:01 · answer #4 · answered by betterhealth@flash.net 2 · 0 0

I took one, it was required for my general education degree. I don't think it's necessary to enjoy visual art to have a knowledge of those things. One can see something beautiful and enjoy it without knowing why it's beautiful, right? However, I do think people should look into education and furthering their minds growth. Just not in any certain prescribed way!

2006-07-10 09:21:54 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I believe it is a matter of taste more than something that can be taught in a class.

I like Picasso's later works in the 50s, as well as some of the other artists work using the Impressionist style.

2006-07-10 10:15:31 · answer #6 · answered by anvilsandinkstudios 3 · 0 0

unfortunately, those art history classes are often "survey courses" taught to provide a broad and general overview of who painted what and when. my opinion is that some kind of "art appreciation" should be part of every general education, but not in that survey form. instead, art appreciation classes should be about learning how to look at and ask questions of art. by learning how to look at art with curious and critical eyes, we can learn how to look at other aspects of culture and society with curious and critical eyes, and to ask questions about what we see and experience. instead of feeding historical facts to students in these courses, the teachers/professors should be engaging students in dialogue with works of art. by engaging with art in this way, people often become curious enough about the work to seek out information on the context of the piece - who made it, why, under what conditions and what inspired them - and they don't need a teacher to hand them that information. this type of art education creates an individual who is able to think for themselves, draw their own conclusions and be active in creating their own knowledge. that's why i think it should be part of everyone's education.

2006-07-10 11:26:13 · answer #7 · answered by smack 3 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers