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

2007-10-14 13:26:42 · 4 answers · asked by regine f 1 in Arts & Humanities Other - Arts & Humanities

have to be essay

2007-10-14 13:28:19 · update #1

4 answers

Like all artistic expressions, Indian art strives to express moral values.

But what is art?
Leo Tolstoy's "What is Art?" (1896) is a treatise concerning the nature and purpose of art, describing how art can express moral values. Tolstoy does not define art in terms of its ability to express form and beauty, but instead defines art in terms of its ability to communicate concepts of morality. For Tolstoy, aesthetic values are defined by moral values.

According to Leo Tolstoy, art cannot be defined as an activity which produces beauty. Beauty cannot be defined objectively, and therefore cannot be used as a criterion to define what is, or is not, art. The aim of art is not merely to produce beauty, or to provide pleasure, enjoyment, or entertainment. Art is a means of communication, and is an important means of expression of any experience, or of any aspect of the human condition.

Tolstoy defines art as an expression of a feeling or experience in such a way that the audience to whom the art is directed can share that feeling or experience. Art does not belong to any particular class of society. To limit the subject matter of art to the experiences of a particular class of society is to deny that art can be important for all of society. Tolstoy criticizes the belief that art is only relevant to a particular class of society, saying that this is a misconception which can lead to obscurity and decadence in art.

According to Tolstoy, good art is intelligible and comprehensible. Bad art is unintelligible and incomprehensible. The more that art restricts itself to a particular audience, the more obscure and incomprehensible it becomes to people outside that particular audience. Good art is not confusing and incomprehensible to most people. To the contrary, good art can communicate its meaning to most people, because it expresses its meaning in a way which can be understood by everyone.

Tolstoy believes that art is good if it is judged to be good by the majority of people. Indeed, he claims that a great work of art is only great if it can be understood by everyone.1 He also argues that if it is not admitted that art must be intelligible and comprehensible, then any unintelligible or incomprehensible expression of thoughts or feelings may be called "art." If any incomprehensible form of personal expression may be called "art," then the definition of art gradually loses its meaning, until it has no meaning at all.2

"Good art" has a form and content which are in unity with the ideas and feelings which it evokes or represents. In contrast, "bad art" lacks unity of form and content with the ideas and feelings which it tries to evoke or represent. "Bad art" is shallow, repetitious, crude, clumsy, contrived, melodramatic, pretentious, or banal.

According to Tolstoy, the most important quality of any work of art is its sincerity.3 Any true work of art expresses original thoughts and feelings. The "highest" feelings which art may express are related to religious perception.

Tolstoy claims that professionalism causes a lack of sincerity in the artist, and argues that if an artist must earn a living by producing art, then the art which is produced is more likely to be false and insincere. Tolstoy also claims that interpretation or criticism of art is irrelevant and unnecessary, because any good work of art is able to express thoughts and feelings which can be clearly understood by most people. Tolstoy argues that any explanation of such thoughts and feelings is superfluous, because art ultimately communicates feelings and experiences in a way which cannot be expressed by any words.

Tolstoy does not believe that art can be taught, or that instruction in the practice of art can help people to communicate their thoughts and feelings more sincerely. He argues that to teach art is to destroy its spontaneity. To teach art is to destroy the individuality of the artist. Any attempt to teach art leads to an attempt to imitate other works of art.
** Refer also to the link below about a celebrated Indian artist and how she regarded Indian art.


good luck

2007-10-14 18:03:27 · answer #1 · answered by ari-pup 7 · 0 0

Origin of Indian Artwork settlements of 3rd millennium BC. you can find different religions and every religion have there different significance and a complex mixture of traditions. Art is basically a representation of ideas and emotions through scratch and a colored form ether in sculpture forms. or you can say that purpose of art is to represent the attachment, emotions and their perception towards culture, traditions and religions.

2014-12-09 20:26:05 · answer #2 · answered by Priya 1 · 0 0

What's the purpose of other's art?

2007-10-14 18:26:39 · answer #3 · answered by kayneriend 6 · 0 0

Hi see the link at- http://www.indianartbuyers.com/pages.php?q=art-blog-article

2014-02-15 19:52:19 · answer #4 · answered by Indian Art Buyers 1 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers