Up until our recent class, I had no prior knowledge of the artists John Cage and Marcel Duchamp. However, I find their messages intriguing. In contemporary art circles, there is questions surrounding the definition of "modern art" and what qualifies as art. I've noticed that many modern art pieces seem to draw inspiration from Marcel Duchamp's "Fountain." In my view, a piece can be considered art as long as it possesses intention and makes the viewer feel something. I do believe that some individuals will make art for the purpose of profit and have no intention in it other than that. It is crazy to me that some in the art community hold such high standards for what can be considered art, because at the end of the day, it is all subjective. The way we see art can be totally different from what people thought in the past. Are perception of art could have been wildly different if certain conditions were changed in the past. It makes you wonder, is a piece good because of what it is, or is it more about the feelings it stirs up and what the artist was trying to say? Recently, I heard about a movie that is being made now but won't release for another 100 years. I wonder if this could be put in a similar category to John Cage and Marcel Duchamp, where the intention of the art is the art itself. Who knows if I will ever get to see it though.
Comments