I had a chance to see the winning artwork of Artwork (Shirt Brand) at SM Manila and while looking at the grand prize, I sort of quizzed myself as to how contemporary art critics judge works of art.
Since judges vary from year to year, I would like to think that the tastes of the individual judges vary as well. Thus said, the winning piece may not be the winning work had the panel of judges been different. Beauty is relative so they say, but the recognition of the winning entry still receives such decorations and recognitions.
I saw works which are truly simple and not extraordinary. They seem to capture a real scenario but they fail to capture the beauty of the picture which it supposed to depict. Should the concept of beauty be truly apparent for a work to be called art? Or art is inherent even if beauty is wanting? Or art and beauty are inseparable?
In the Philippine movie industry, directors and critics keep on arguing that whenever there exists a sexy scene on the movie or scene which involves gun and death, it is a portrayal of art. The viewing public does not clearly delineate whether or not a given work of art is indeed art or short of it. The public opinion simply focuses on whether or not the work of art is acceptable according to their taste.
If the concept of beauty is relative, then beauty cannot be defined because of the complexities of beauty which does not have an across culture validity. More often than not, men from the Orient especially those from the Philippines admire women who have long hair and fair complexion to white complexion. Never will a person hear somebody saying in Filipino, ‘Wow, pare ang itim!” It is ironic however that Occidental men are fans of women who have dark complexion. As one author says, black beauty is a box office hit in Europe.
Mountain of garbage is truly an eye-sore but not if camera lenses took pictures from a wholly different angle. Imagine Princess Diana walking on top of the mountain of garbage. Some might say: Hey, this is not an eye-sore, this is a real work of art! One might disagree and such disagreement is simply an affirmation that beauty cannot have an objective standards but specific to the brain structures of the person who judges the piece.
Fiona fell in love with Shrek despite the confession that he is an ogre. Im not saying that he is ugly, he simply doesn't pass my personal standards of a lovable ogre.
You see, if it is indeed true that beauty is relative to the observer, then the conclusion is the concept of ugliness is relative as well. Hence, judging that one is ugly is always erroneous. The right way of saying it is that the work does not fit one’s taste because the work might be pleasing to other judges.
Ultimately, this piece is a work of art.
Since judges vary from year to year, I would like to think that the tastes of the individual judges vary as well. Thus said, the winning piece may not be the winning work had the panel of judges been different. Beauty is relative so they say, but the recognition of the winning entry still receives such decorations and recognitions.
I saw works which are truly simple and not extraordinary. They seem to capture a real scenario but they fail to capture the beauty of the picture which it supposed to depict. Should the concept of beauty be truly apparent for a work to be called art? Or art is inherent even if beauty is wanting? Or art and beauty are inseparable?
In the Philippine movie industry, directors and critics keep on arguing that whenever there exists a sexy scene on the movie or scene which involves gun and death, it is a portrayal of art. The viewing public does not clearly delineate whether or not a given work of art is indeed art or short of it. The public opinion simply focuses on whether or not the work of art is acceptable according to their taste.
If the concept of beauty is relative, then beauty cannot be defined because of the complexities of beauty which does not have an across culture validity. More often than not, men from the Orient especially those from the Philippines admire women who have long hair and fair complexion to white complexion. Never will a person hear somebody saying in Filipino, ‘Wow, pare ang itim!” It is ironic however that Occidental men are fans of women who have dark complexion. As one author says, black beauty is a box office hit in Europe.
Mountain of garbage is truly an eye-sore but not if camera lenses took pictures from a wholly different angle. Imagine Princess Diana walking on top of the mountain of garbage. Some might say: Hey, this is not an eye-sore, this is a real work of art! One might disagree and such disagreement is simply an affirmation that beauty cannot have an objective standards but specific to the brain structures of the person who judges the piece.
Fiona fell in love with Shrek despite the confession that he is an ogre. Im not saying that he is ugly, he simply doesn't pass my personal standards of a lovable ogre.
You see, if it is indeed true that beauty is relative to the observer, then the conclusion is the concept of ugliness is relative as well. Hence, judging that one is ugly is always erroneous. The right way of saying it is that the work does not fit one’s taste because the work might be pleasing to other judges.
Ultimately, this piece is a work of art.
Whatdyahthink?
No comments:
Post a Comment