Chapter Five Questions
1. How can we judge whether a work is good or not based off criteria, when art can literally be anything? And by anything, I mean anything as the history of art shows. It is possible for someone to not like a work, but tell an artist that their work is not adequate enough to be hung on the elite's walls or not good enough to be commercialized is not right. There is a market for almost everything in this world.
2. On page 149, the book talks about how there are rules and reasons that are means of judging art. " ratings, rules, and reasons." How are there rules in the art world when art is in so many different forms?
3. On page 164, the book says Artworks, not artists, are the objects of judgement. Do you think this is always true, because some artists were in the spotlight more so then there are because of their behaviors and interactions with critics?
1. How can we judge whether a work is good or not based off criteria, when art can literally be anything? And by anything, I mean anything as the history of art shows. It is possible for someone to not like a work, but tell an artist that their work is not adequate enough to be hung on the elite's walls or not good enough to be commercialized is not right. There is a market for almost everything in this world.
2. On page 149, the book talks about how there are rules and reasons that are means of judging art. " ratings, rules, and reasons." How are there rules in the art world when art is in so many different forms?
3. On page 164, the book says Artworks, not artists, are the objects of judgement. Do you think this is always true, because some artists were in the spotlight more so then there are because of their behaviors and interactions with critics?
No comments:
Post a Comment