In many shops these days you can find canvases and prints with little more than splashes of colour or swirly shapes. But are these items simply decorative, like wallpaper, or are they art. At the risk of outraging the art aficionados out there, I am going to illustrate this question by comparing a traditional oil painting to "Charity Splash", a typical example of these objects.
"The Corn Harvest" (left hand picture) was painted by Pieter Bruegel the Elder in 1565. It is currently displayed in New York at the Metropolitan Museum of Art (where it is referred to as The Harvesters). Its place in art history has been well established over the years and I doubt that anyone would argue about whether it is truly art. But what about "Charity Splash" (right hand picture), an anonymous square foot of canvas found at the bottom of a box in a charity shop? Can we reasonably (or unreasonably) describe it as art?
I think it is art. Why? Well, somebody must have created the original, and presumably that person was an artist. Their intention was surely to create something artistic regardless of its ultimate purpose. The picture's abstract style does not stop it from being described as art. Abstract art has been around for over one hundred years and is a recognised art form. I would also argue that it is probably more artistic than some of the piles of rubbish presented as art nowadays!
So, although "Charity Splash" and similar items are used mainly for decorative purposes, they are definitely art.
Love Your Art,
Vince
No comments:
Post a Comment