For man, art consists of making the world in which he lives habitable. Through art, man tames his world, creates links, in a way that preserves a relationship of gratuity, of detachment. In every work of art, something escapes all regimentation. Art is useless but it is essential because of its particular dimension that it introduces into human life. It allows us to escape the noise and fury of things, and through contemplation it brings us to interior silence, the condition of transcendence.
Art, in all its forms, is undoubtedly one of the main drivers of culture. It should be noted that “cultivating oneself” means enriching one’s mind, developing oneself through education, etc. It would seem that, when applied to a work of art, the capacity to estimate, evaluate, judge, and therefore appreciate a work would be a capacity of the cultivated man fully realized in his relationship to art…
Do you have to be educated to appreciate a work of art?
We then enter a paradox: on the one hand the work of art must be what provokes particular emotions in me, what relates to my subjectivity through my sensitivity, and on the other hand, my aesthetic appreciation of the work would depend on my cultural and artistic knowledge.
We can then ask these questions: Is it necessary to possess artistic knowledge to appreciate a work of art? What skills do you need to have to appreciate a work of art? Isn't culture necessary for a perfect understanding and cohesion of the viewer with the work, and therefore with the artist? Does recognizing an artist's technique mean appreciating a work of art?
First of all we will see during this analysis that man does not need to be cultured; we will see that to appreciate it completely man needs to understand it.
First of all, we can say that man does not need to be cultured to appreciate a work of art since it is his sensitivity which will first be touched. Each of us has our own sensitivity to appreciating art. To appreciate a work of art you have to know how to give it value and be sensitive to it because art is something that touches us, that appeals to emotion, and this emotion can vary from person to person. 'other, since we don't all feel the same thing. We appreciate a work of art when it makes us feel pleasant feelings, when it brings back good memories, when it represents a subject that we like, etc.
In the film “Dialogue with my gardener” directed by Jean Becker, the gardener, who has no artistic knowledge, “appreciates” certain works of art without knowing the painter, nor his history, simply because they remind him of memories. For example, the painting by Eugène Delacroix, Liberty Leading the People, the gardener remembers seeing this painting on the French hundred franc bank note and on his calendar, he said that his family “liked it”. The gardener instead looks for works of art that represent things “that are important to him”.
We appreciate a work when we find it beautiful. We see a special beauty in her. When the amateur says it is beautiful, he appreciates the work of art because it gives him a satisfaction that lasts, according to Epicurus it is compromised happiness: the amateur exercises his freedom and his satisfaction is complete because he has the free play of reason and sensitivity, however its satisfaction will not be lasting because there will be a difficult return to existence.
Man does not need to be cultured to appreciate a work of art to the extent that this culture alters his impression of it because nothing is more pleasant than a naive look at any work, allowing thus giving free rein to one's first impressions and reactions, without worrying about laws or rules imposed by society. When faced with a work of art, it is no longer a question of knowing, it is sensitive perception that takes over, everyone interprets it freely. Whether it is music, painting, photography, etc., to appreciate a work of art you must above all use your five senses. The most important thing is to feel feelings, pleasure, to have a first contact which must be done in a primary, innocent way, more spiritual than intellectual.
We can therefore say that since a work of art can only be evaluated by the emotion it arouses in those who look at it, culture does not intervene in any way. Thus, answering this question in the affirmative would amount to saying that it takes culture to experience feelings, which would be an aberration.However, to appreciate a work of art at its true value, man requires an initial culture, a minimum of knowledge about the work or the artist. This makes it possible to reflect the value of the work, the complexity of the work and the different messages that may be hidden within it. Art requires an audience capable of understanding it. To appreciate a work of art, it is essential to know the difference between what is beautiful and what is merely pleasant. It is useful to have some notions to appreciate a work of art, particularly in relation to its date of creation for example to be able to represent it in its historical context and the artistic movement from which it emerges. Knowing art, having a minimum of culture helps to amplify and reinforce the attraction it gives us.
Culture is essential in the complete appreciation of a work.
Many works of art remain completely incomprehensible to the vast majority of the public. Sometimes they do not bring them any pleasure for the sole reason that this majority has not learned to appreciate them. We must therefore learn the language, the message conveyed through these works.
As for example in the book “Art” By Yasmina Reza: Serge has just bought a work of contemporary art for 200,000 francs, a canvas of approximately one meter sixty by one meter twenty painted white, with fine white edging transverse. His two friends do not understand the feeling of fascination that Serge feels in front of this painting. For them it is just a white board, they are shocked that Serge has paid such a sum of money for this type of canvas and therefore do not understand his gesture:
Marc to Serge: “Did you buy this shit for two hundred thousand francs? »
Serge to Marc, in response: “But man, that’s the price! It's an ANTRIOS! »
These quotes show us that when we are cultured we open up the aesthetic song and we listen less to our sensitivity. Sometimes because the artist is known we appreciate the works of art of this artist, however his works may not touch our sensitivity, we may not feel any emotion. It is because we are told that his works are extraordinary that we will appreciate them, our judgment will then no longer be subjective. Culture can stifle the emotional connection with the work of art: there is a distance that is created with the work, it is then that we lose artistic emotion.
Cultivated people know how to appreciate the work at its true value to the extent that they attach importance to the work, perhaps seeing it under a new and more sensitive eye while the person who is not cultured will pass perhaps next to it and will be indifferent to it.
We can conclude that to appreciate a work of art man does not need to be cultured because he only needs his senses and his emotions to appreciate it. However, to fully appreciate its true value, man needs a minimum of knowledge about the work or the artist in order to be able to place the work of art in its context and to be able to “decode” the message conveyed by it. the artist. We can also add that the more universal the work of art is, the less there is a need for culture. In addition, a work of art can make us want to know the artist and his story better, it then pushes us to seek out more culture. Art cultivates us and all forms of art enrich our culture. Following this analysis, we can finally ask ourselves if art pushes us to cultivate ourselves and is this form of culture accessible to everyone? © Fine Art Expertises LLC
コメント