2007-01-13 01:28:36 · 6 answers · asked by Anonymous in Arts & Humanities ➔ Other - Arts & Humanities
At least to the person making it, and even then what does it matter what anyone else thinks of it. It really is your perception of it that matters, hence why some like Pollack, and other despise him, but love Manet.
It isn't so much a should question. It is.
2007-01-13 01:32:48 · answer #1 · answered by kriltzen 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It all depends on the viewer. If one can admire something for what it is that's fine. My problem is when people dismiss something in art solely because "I just don't like it." Many are quick to judge a piece without any knowledge of what the artist's attempt was in creating it. After learning what many of the artist's of the past, and present,were thinking and reacting to, it gives one some perspective. If you can formulate an opinion through an understanding of what the work is, then you are well on your way to being taken seriously in your critique.
2007-01-13 11:38:50 · answer #2 · answered by Randzz 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
There is no "should" about it, but those interested can study art appreciation to heighten their finer senses. But there is nothing wrong in not understanding art or appreciateling. Different strokes for different folks!
2007-01-13 10:28:41 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
The beauty of art is that everyone can have their own interpretation of it,so no.
2007-01-14 14:24:18 · answer #4 · answered by Celebrity girl 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It doesn't have to be. Do you mean to use the word "appreciated"?
That would be nice, but artists are like musicians. Not everyone likes the same music.
2007-01-13 09:33:07 · answer #5 · answered by gg 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
Not necessarily, though I think they should be felt.
2007-01-13 12:19:42 · answer #6 · answered by woman in the well 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋