I have mixed feelings about interpreting art. Interpreting is a great part of enjoying art, in fact, it is almost an immediate reaction you have when looking at art. You look at it, you interpret it. Interpreting doesn't necessarily mean trying to understand what the artist exactly meant to do. You can really take it anyway you want, and this is one of the best concepts of art; art is for "everyone."
However, sometimes, the idea of interpreting really takes the viewers away from enjoying art, and promotes artists to create "smart art." Past years in Tyler, I have noticed how many students were basically trained to be "conceptual." Of course, it is very important to be conceptual and thoughtful through the works you make, but many people get stuck in the idea of being "conceptual" and, as a result, art is about analyzing the concept, rather than enjoying the beauty of it. Interpretation should be followed by art, but it became the other way around - art supports the interpretation.
It is difficult for me to say that interpreting art is bad. I mean, it is necessary and important. I think we should find a balance in what is interpreting and what is "over-analyzing", so art doesn't become all about being smart. So, how we find a good balance between intelligence and emotion?
No comments:
Post a Comment