why is paint thrown on a canvas considered art?

Question

and shown at galleries ????????????????????

Answer 1

Well, first of all, I hate art like that, it's being disrespectful to art itself.

If you look back in history, most of those famous artists are also scientists, historian, mathmatician, literature critic...etc. Therefore art back then is much more sophisticated, and artist was a much more respected profession.

Most artists today are those who can't do anything else, so they think being an artist is easy. So now the art world is full of those people. How can you expect them to paint Mars and Venus when they don't even know who they are? That's why all they can paint is throwing paints on a canvas.

If you tell them their painting is crap, they'll whine about how no one understands their art and no one respects artists anymore. Well, why should anyone respect someone who make a career throwing paints on a canvas?

Answer 2

Arthur Danto's essay about "The Artworld" illustrates George Dickie's prevailing Institutional Definition of Art. It basically says if the "artworld" ie. museums, critics, and artists among others, define something as art - it is art. In other words if it is exhibited in a museum or gallery it is art. That doesn't say anything qualitative about the art. It doesn't say it's good or bad. It just says it's art. The value judgments are down to the viewer.

Jackson Pollock is the most famous example of throwing paint at a canvas and there are many explanations of his art you can read.

John Ruskin, the Victorian critic was sued by James Whistler for libel because he questioned the value of a painting that he said looked as if Whistler "threw a pot of paint at the canvas." Whistler won that case. This is an old question.

Answer 3

Well that's what is funny: it depend on who is throwing paint at the canvas.
Rent the movie "who in the xxxx is Jackson Pollock.?" It is a true story of a 65 year old woman who bought a huge painting of spattered art for $5 at a thrift shop, and tried for 10 years to prove Jackson Pollock had painted it though the art was unsigned. If she could prove it was his painting, (and it looked just like his) it was worth Fifty million dollars!!!. If he did not paint it, it was worth zip. By the way, from the forensic evidence like finger prints and paint matching, I think the lady with the Pollock painting had the real thing, but you would not believe the idiots who refused to believe it. This is a must see movie.
Also there is a story which I believe to be true, that the Communist, after WWII sent agents to the US to buy and to run up the prices on modern art in a convoluted attempt to undermine the society of America. Now I don't think modern art does this, but I think we can thank the communist's for the sudden popularity in some of this art.

Answer 4

It represents emotions of the artist, the hardship and emotions of the time period and environment, and represents anything else the artist feels like portraying. It shouldn't really actually "represent" anything, but more of a perception thing. They demonstrate emotions as a visible concept. Emotions are a beautiful thing. And Art is just one beautiful way to show it.

Answer 5

Paint thrown on canvas may be art, but it certainly doesn't fall under the catagory of skill. It's generally a self-indulgent, inaccessible, subjective display of incompetance.

Answer 6

That sounds so cool! I personally think keeping the woman in a hot color among male cool colors would look awesome: one bright hot spot in an ocean. Eh, the burnt bra would be a bit cliche feminist painting in my opinion. I think this painting could really stand out and the burnt bra would just bog it down with feminist stereotypes. Good luck! And happy naked painting!

Answer 7

Two comments I always remember about art:

1. Art...I know what I like.

2. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.

Answer 8

Because like the price of memorabilia whatever someone will pay is what it is worth. Art is in the eye of the beholder. The thing is you have to be known or sponsored by someone to get your start.

Answer 9

beacause art is really about expressing how you feel and i guess that's how some people feel. art is really all about the viewer and what the artist is trying to express to the viewer. most often this is probably some feeling of inner chaos or chaos in the world around them..wikipedia jackson pollock if you want to know more..

Answer 10

it is supposed to be the representation of the emotions inside the artist's head and a picture of how the artist feels at a specific time. the colors can also be emotions and feelings.
hope this helps.