In your opinion SHOULD ART HAVE STANDARDS???

Question

By standards I mean levels or means in which to deem it good or bad. I personally don't think it should but a lot of people do.

Answer 1

NO. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and who is to say that one piece of art is good or bad based on standards set forth. Look at some of the most famous art work....they are all very different and by different people. Setting standards for art is taking the individuality out of the artist, and making them conform instead of expressing themselves!

Answer 2

Yes, yes, and yes.

People will argue that art is a way for a person to channel their creativity, which it is, but it is not fair to say a person who has worked years and years on drawing the human body is the same as a beginner who can't draw a stick figure.

An true artist studies. They are a slave to their work and must learn. It really annoys me when I see abstract art, because though it may have been someone's creativity, they haven't studied anything. They don't know anything.

Everyone else has said that art shouldn't, but it always will, won't it? There's not stopping it, because we like to compare a drawing of a flower to a flower in real life, and how can you honestly say that is not a standard?

Answer 3

Hope you choose Courtney's answer, she's totally correct. Until the 20th century, artists went through years and years of rigorous training. It was referred to as Atelier - and it might have begun with an entire year of nothing but charcoal drawings of still lifes, or drapes, or eggs. It progressed year by year until an artist finally understood the science of perspective, physiology, color and light. They earned the title of Master.

AFTER that, if an artist wants to break away, they can. Even abstracts, the ones that capture our attention, encompass principles of art. That is one reason the Impressionist and cubist movements were so successful and enduring, because they were founded in knowledge. Most of the art of the following century, where all that knowledge was thrown out the window, is without value and forgotten already.

That is not to say that a painting done by Grandma in retirement home craft class could not be endearing and appealing, but the appeal is not going to be widespread.

Answer 4

If a child throws paint on a canvas and it catches someones eye and that person happens to like it, is it not art because of the age of the person who created it. Art is art...weather its music, painting or poetry. And having standards takes away the freedom of which it is created. So the next time you dribble paint on the floor look at it with an open mind instead of just a drop of paint on the floor.

Answer 5

Thats a good idea but what standards would apply. Art is an always moving target. Who decides what are the standards. And would there be a adult only section for the ones that are not approved?

Answer 6

Contemporary Art's standards are almost entirely conceptually based, and the art object has supposedly no status (though obviously when you go into a museum or conceptual art exhibit you find everything of very high monetary value)...there are many ironies in the contemporary art world. Look up Lucy Lippards' book about this, "Six Years: the dematerialization of art"

Answer 7

I think the art 'industry' self-standardises - fortunately, its 'fad' driven which means that the standards ebb and flow - I think thats what gives art its relevance and picks out the geniuses of the day! I could be talking mince of course....this is a personal opinion.

Answer 8

SIM 1 said it quite well. Who sets the standard? I have done shows that were panned by the critics and were a great box office hit. I have also done shows that were lauded by critics but you couldn't give away a ticket. In essence Art sets it's own standard doesn't it?

Answer 9

NO, i'm studying A-level art and hate the fact the my teachers and other people, judge my work.
Just because one person deems it to be of poor quality does that make it true?

Answer 10

I don't think so. Art is based on opinion. I believe that classifications of art are okay, like seperating modern from classic, but otherwise, no.

I think it's also unfair to grade art, like they do at schools. Art is like a representation of one's personality, soul, and feelings. Since when did people grade personalities?