What's the difference between good art and bad art?

Question

I saw a nice picture today and I thought about buying it, but then I got paranoid incase all my bourgeois friends thought it was cheap and tacky.

Answer 1

You are asking 2 different questions. The first: What's the difference between good and bad art? I can answer that one definitively.


The 2nd question seems to be: Should you buy a piece of art that you really like (but you think your friends will find unacceptable)?
Only you can deal with that one. But I'm in concensus with of most of the ideas given so far...it's your wall, your eyes, your life.


The first question has to do with how the art is "constructed". You can ask the same question about any THING. What is the difference between a good house and a bad house. A good house has a solid foundation, walls that are plumb and square and so on. It uses the tried and true history of carpentry and masonry to inform it's construction.

Good art uses the elements of design, color theory, good draughtsmanship, proportion and so on to make an image or object that is, like a good house, well constructed.

Most people cannot look at a house and tell if it is well constructed. They can tell you whether they like it or they don't. A carpenter, however, can look at a house and say: "There are problems here, here and here."

Most people cannot look at a painting and tell if it is well constructed. And the same rules as above apply. Except the expert in question is an artist or curator.

Ultimately, if you want to know about good art, look at lots of it. Take a 2-dimensional design course or an art appreciation course at a local community college. Otherwise, buy the work you like.

Answer 2

"Good" art usually attempts to push the boundary of expression. It is less about 'craftsmanship' and 'beauty', and more about emotion, exploration, and the response it gets from the artist and viewer alike. Art can be beautiful, ugly, shocking, erotic, political, thought provoking, etc. Yes, some 'art' is largely a scam. But the great artists always have something to say, some vision to express, rather than just paint a picture or make a statue. Edit - "Bad" art, on the other hand, is almost harder to define. It might be descibed as art created only for sale. Or, art that does not push the boundaries of creativity, is dirivitive, or melodramatic. It also lacks any craftsmanship or ability.

Answer 3

Lol, "bourgeois friends"....
Well if it was a black light space-wizard print then they might be right.
Everything in art is subjective and a matter of perspective.
I think it is one's level of involvement in art, especially with formal study, that influences their opinion. The work of the "masters" becomes one's standard the more they are studied, but more importantly the processes they've used to create their images. People that are into art want to see Evidence of Process! Also the use of the standard elements of art and design. Sounds mechanical, but all original art stems from processing these elements.
If art is part of your life, then seeing that the artist is mindful of this is important.
I'd call the majority of department-store art prints poorly composed, superficial, subject-centric, mass marketed, and they detract from the sales of local artists, though that's a generalization.
Fine art by contrast is more about the painting itself as a thing, and paint as a substance, not the accuracy of the representation of the subject, sometimes no distinct subject like in abstract art. It's more than "nice" it's a tool a person uses to experience the world in a different way, and for that person, it's real. That's one perspective. The other might be from someone looking to hang something nice behind the couch. Even if it's so called "low art" subject matter, like a barn or a castle, look for evidence of process; look for paint composed to represent a barn rather than a "seamless" or glossy image because to the experienced eye, gloss is artificial and seamlessness just doesn't exist. There really isn't any final answer in art, it's just a question that goes on and on.

Answer 4

I had an art teacher that said if a person either loves it or hates it then its art because it has created a reaction.
Personally, I think it has to hold your interest and attention. Don't buy something you will tire of! If its an investment then you consider $$$ plus return or your supposed return.
I think if your interest and pleasure are held by this piece and youre not paying some outrageous price (due to galleries and reps asking as much as 50% each) then go for it- its your home and wall. Being an individual is not based on your friends reactions or advice!

Answer 5

You should buy to please yourself not others.
To me good art is the skill of the artist to recreate a scene,animal or human figure, whatever medium is used. Bad is throwing a pile of junk together or worse, cutting a cow in half and calling it Art.Guess which sells for higher prices though!
Many will disagree but so what!
We are all individuals with our own ideas of good and bad!

Answer 6

Buy the art you like, art is like music or anything else it is down to personal taste whether you think it is good or not. If you like it who cares what your friends think, you are buying it for you not them.

Answer 7

Art you like is good the rest is bad art. Don't be concerned that your taste isn't refined enough. buy what makes you happy anf hang it where you can see it all the time.

Answer 8

There is no such thing as bad art. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Answer 9

there is no such thing as good art or bad, art is what you see so if you think it is good it doesn;t matter what others are thinking you liked it you were prepared to pay for it,
I like cezanne, but i do not see anything in jackson pollocks work so i would buy cezanne.

Answer 10

The one and only difference is this: OPINION. Everyone has a right to their own opinion. Your friends could think the artwork horrible but you love it and that's all that really matters.