When first reading Clive Bells view on what art truly is, I was completely and utterly confused. Not to sound cliché but it was the truth. I could not grasp the concept of that he was trying to portray. But through further reading I was able to understand his concepts and make critics on why I believed his theory could not define art. In my opinion when an artist has a preference, (in this case a strong preference) towards a certain genre of art they tend to be more likely to form their theories in relation to those preferences, therefore creating a theory that will defend this art form and leaving out many others. In my opinion Bell’s theory has a very biased nature, I do not truly know if this is done on purpose or maybe out of pure instinct to defend a genre of art he loves, but in any case his theories have only shown me a way to defend abstract art, not a way to define art as a whole.
No comments:
Post a Comment