2007-01-13 01:09:43 · 5 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ Other - Arts & Humanities
It all depends on what you mean by "understood."
If you mean, should it be readily accessable, the answer is decidedly NOT. If you mean, should it be intellectually and/or emotionally challenging, the answer is decidedly YES.
When the Cubists and Futurists burst on the scene in the early 20th century, their work was roundly criticized as being bizarre. But it was merely new. And yet, however new, it was both intellectually stimulating and emotionally evocative. One of the problems is that people get stuck in a rut, and just want a steady diet of the comfortable and conventional. They want something "pretty" -- or even worse -- "nice" (ARRRGH!!!)
All art must ultimately have a purpose, though. All too often today, would-be artists just throw things together without thought or real inspiration, and they call it "art." Well, just because you call it art doesn't make it so. I can call myself a Guernsey Cow, but that doesn't mean I'm going to chew cud and give a gallon of milk.
Should art always strive to shake people out of complacency with a new vision? Absolutely. But that vision must always be guided by sound intellectual and aesthetic principles, otherwise is has no more claim to art than the scratching of a hyper-active four year old. The successful work of art should always cause the individual to stretch outside the comfort zone of conventional expectations.
Hope this helps. Cheers, mate.
2007-01-13 01:34:01 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
A difficult question. There have been many art movements that defied the preconception that art should be beautiful and understood by all. In my experience, if I don't understand something I usually don't like it either. Artists have always had much more sensitivity than the masses, they were ahead of their times, but eventually their purpose and goals were clear to all. So,yeah...I think art should be understood it it ever desires to be accepted. It is human nature to dislike or even fear that which you don't understand.
2007-01-13 09:25:34 · answer #2 · answered by sanja2lica 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Not necessarily. In some cases the subject and content is very easily determined; in other cases, the painting, sculpture, photo, etc. might make sense only to the artist.
It is all up to the artist.
2007-01-13 09:27:41 · answer #3 · answered by willow oak 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Different peple have their different understandings so, yes.
2007-01-13 09:28:51 · answer #4 · answered by Jeniv the Brit 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
no , not really . as long as it looks good .
2007-01-13 15:24:23 · answer #5 · answered by jsjmlj 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋