What do you think of art that requires a museum docent or curator to explain why it qualifies as art?
by 
ANSWERS: 1
-
Most people are not well-educated on the subject of art. They know little about it, and they do need some expert assistance to understand it. That's especially true of much avant-garde art. Bear in mind that many people didn't regard the Impressionists as art back when they first began exhibiting in the 19th century. They couldn't get their paintings into the official Salons, because they didn't look like art as most people of the era understood it. Museums provide trained docents and -- in some cases -- professional curators to help the inexperienced learn about their holdings. There's not much point in wandering around a museum alone when you have no idea what you're looking at and why it's considered aesthetically and/or historically important. I'm a former museum administrator, so I do know what I'm talking about on this subject.
-
-
Franco333 Impressionism is a bad example. One does not need a docent to explain what the art is about, nor why it should be considered art. Monet is a far cry from Picasso, who in turn is a long way from that of Stella. I would submit that any 'art' that requires an interpreter or translator is not real art....rather the pretensions of the intelligentsia, and self-delusions of the pseudo-intellectual. -
Victorine I'm afraid that you are one of those people who is badly educated on the subject. Sorry, but your comment amply demonstrates that. Take a few serious classes. You'll find them eye-opening.
-
RELATED QUESTIONS
Copyright 2023, Wired Ivy, LLC