Mrs. Weber
After we have finished our in-class debates and discussions, what are your thoughts? - Does art have value in our modern day society? - Does art waste taxpayer dollars that could be better spent on areas of need in our society?
14 Comments
Noah Pardell
3/13/2014 01:39:17 am
Art is subjective, that is, some people like it some do not. From my perspective public art, especially that which is located in an exposed section of the city, does not have value. Such 'pieces' could include the Calgary hoop, or Edmonton silver balls. This is because art is an expression from within, that helps define the artist. The problem with public art is that yes it might somehow define the artist, but when placed in a city and FOR the city, it no longer becomes a personal definition, but rather a generalization of all society. Most people do not want to identify let alone be identified by a construct they have no personal investment in.
Reply
Jessica and Gloria
3/13/2014 01:43:34 am
Art does have value in our society. I believe that the freedom to express ourselves that we have in Canada should be something to value. Imagine living in a city where any form of self-expression was legal. When an individual was inspired, they could draw wherever they wanted; where streets were filled with color and emotion that would inspire the next artist to do the same. Where walking down a back alley was no longer dark but instead it felt like a street party and everyone was invited. Where the roads were weren’t just lined with rows of boring buildings and brick walls. Not only is art seen as beautiful and unique, it helps us grow as individuals. It helps us understand life experiences, and express parts of ourselves that we wouldn’t be able to say in words. For art to be expressed truly and honestly it has to be done for ourselves; art for the masses is diluted and therefore loses the emotional influence it could have. Life without color and beauty would be dull, we’d lose our will to live our lives to the fullest and experience the possible beauty for ourselves.
Reply
Brad
3/13/2014 01:44:03 am
I believe that art does have value in our society. It shows our cultures, how we think and what we believe. Although, I do believe that the people in charge of these "works of art" need to understand that the simplistic is not very artistic. Spending millions of dollars on a blue circle? or on a white canvas with a vertical blue line? or even a rope that is nailed to the wall? In my opinion, it's quite pathetic. I believe art is a value to society. We just need to stop spending so much money on something that takes seconds to nail to a wall.
Reply
Kayleigh
3/13/2014 01:49:03 am
Art has value to society because it can represent different cultures. In Canada, we have many different cultures like aboriginals, Europeans, Asians, etc. Because our country has so many different kinds of people, it would make sense to have art to represent these cultures to better understand each other. Art can also shine a light on our values and beliefs; the blue ring could represent unity. The blue ring is a statement piece for Calgary. It tells people that hey we're in this together. It is big for a reason. It shows that we have strength as a unit and that we are not leaving anyone in the dark; hence the lights at the top. I believe that when the person who chose to purchase this art piece decided that this would represent Calgary, they did a good job picking it out because, it does not symbolize any one culture, but a piece that represents a mass of different beliefs.
Reply
Rory Campbell
3/13/2014 01:50:52 am
I believe art has value to the individual but when we make art for a large mass of people the beauty may become lost in trying to please everyone. Art evokes certain emotions in ourselves that we hold dear but when an installation is made for thousands of people the value is becomes diluted in simplification. The artist loses their personal touch with the piece as it is made for the people and not for themselves. The tone is lost and the piece may become an obstruction of the view rather than the view itself. However, art that stems for the heart and the creative minds that create through themselves is truly a beautiful piece of society. Those who wish to spend their time and money in appreciating such art shows that there are many who value art in society. In public art however, the government is forcing citizens to “appreciate” art with their money. This, I believe, is a destruction of the purpose of art. Art is create to be enjoyed by those who wish to enjoy the pieces from creative minds, therefore if we force people into this experience the installations become nothing but a bother to all of society. Art has its place in society but we are destroying the purpose by stretching the piece over a large population.
Reply
Sarah
3/13/2014 01:51:44 am
Government money should not be spent on works of art just to please the art community. While it is true that they feel "oppressed" because they dont have as much support as say those who play sports or are solely academic, at least the government funds spent on athletics are promoting active healthy lifestyles in society. Childhood obesity is an epidemic. If we build a new hockey rink, multiplex, or soccer pitch, then at least kids would have the oppourtunity to get out the house and get active rather than spending an absurd amount of money to see a giant blue ring on the horizon. Education and spending money on schools is also a priority seeing as budget cuts over the past years have increased class sizes and made it harder for students, especially the primary age group. (Elementary students) Now don't get me wrong, if your goal is to go to college someday and get an art degree, please dont let me stop you. Come talk to me in 20 years and tell me all about your successful career. I guess my point is, government money could be spent on a lot better things, like I mentioned education and athletics, not to mention real social issues in our society such as homelessness, hunger, and poverty.
Reply
Justin Ruptash
3/13/2014 01:52:48 am
yes art has value! it is representative of the culture and history of a society. Art is a reflection of religious, cultural, or societal pride and therefor is valued to the extent of the viewers connectedness with the piece. However, when a government gives a budget that must be filled, the art is uninspired. With the absence of passion from the work the viewers will start to feel hastily and frustrated simply because there is no connection. When the artist produces personally inspired work there is more probability that the viewers will feel an association to the piece more exponentially, rather than money driven work.
Reply
Murphy
3/13/2014 01:53:05 am
Yes, I do think great art has value in our modern society, but also that we should rethink what can be automatically classified as art. The fact that pieces of garbage stacked together (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b3/Beachjunkart.jpg) has been praised as thought provoking outsider art confuses me. I feel that classifying this pile on the beach in the same category as Vermeer depreciates our concept of art. Just because the author has told us it is a profound comment on the consumerism of modern society does not make it so. I understand that beauty is in the eyes of the beholder, but when it comes to our tax money, the beholder should not be a small minority. We need art that improves the landscape of the city, not art that confuses the average citizen as to why it was ever created. Our response to a city’s sculpture should not be “I could have made that” or “It cost HOW much?”, both which were heard as we looked at Traveling Light for the first time. Ideally, we should feel an appreciation for the work and attention that was paid to creating the piece. I think we should stop throwing money at art simply because we think we should, but because we think it deserves it.
Reply
Erin Wohlgemuth
3/13/2014 01:53:19 am
Humans have many needs. We need certain essentials such as food and shelter to survive. But we also need elements in our lives meant purely for mental wellness. We need to be moved on an emotional level. We need to feel a connection to the rest of the world. We need to be exposed to different cultures. We need to be introduced to new ideas. We need to be pushed beyond who we are right now and our present opinions. We need to think. Art can incite us to do this. This is partially because visual art is up for interpretation. Few pieces have the power to move every individual who views it. Usually, a piece will impact one person immensely while having no little influence on the next This congruity between opinions is a great way to incite debates and to force opposing sides to contemplate different perspectives and opinions. However, this is also one of the problems with art. Since a society as a whole cannot agree on what is 'good art', there is no way to insure that the budget will not be wasted on meaningless art. Despite the difficulty of finding powerful artwork, governments should still invest in the intellectual and emotional wellbeing of the society. Of course, preventative measures should be taken to avoid purchasing 'bad art'. This could be accomplished by hiring a diverse group of experts or by organizing poles of citizens opinions. So yes, we should be investing in art. Even if we risk putting up art that many are not moved by, we will be investing in the spiritual wellbeing of the universe.
Reply
Ally
3/13/2014 01:54:01 am
I believe that art is very important in today’s society. Art can bring people together as a collective but it can also evoke emotions individually. Art has been a part of human culture since the beginning. For example: primitive ‘cave’ people painted on cave walls to tell stories, and today artists use their skills to tell stories of their own. The wonderful thing about sculptures, paintings and drawings is that the artist can have one intention for their piece but every single viewer reacts in a different way.
Reply
Jessika
3/13/2014 01:54:17 am
"Art" is a very contriversal topic, mainly because there is no real classification of art. Art could be a painting or a sulpture, or even a big blue hoop. Arts goal is to evoke emotion and thought. Great art expresses the spirit of truth and is timeless.
Reply
Hailey and Morgan
3/13/2014 01:55:11 am
Yes, art does have value in our modern day society. Art gives individuals the opportUNITY to enhance their sense of community within the collective by allowing the expression of each unique culture to be proudly displayed. Art gives a daily reminder to the citizens that even in cities so big there is still a sense of togetherness.
Reply
Reuben
3/13/2014 01:55:24 am
Leo Tolstoy said that in order for art to be considered art it has to evoke the same or similar emotional response that the artist had while they were making it. That being said, art then has to be inspired or passionate in order to be called art in the first place, and by that definition, a government ordered craft project with no other purpose than to fill a budget cannot be considered art at all. So yes real art does provide value to our society either through sacred or intrinsic value, inspiring feelings of awe and respect for the people gifted enough to create such a piece as well as the piece itself. In our society everything has a monetary value, but the real value in art comes from the uniquely human ability to draw an emotional response from canvas and paint.
Reply
Arbuckle for Mayor
3/13/2014 01:56:20 am
Art has value in our society. It makes us think. Makes us question. Ask why. Why not?
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
St. Mary'sThis blog is intended for intellectual follow up to debates in both Junior and Senior High social and language arts classes at St. Mary's Sexsmith ArchivesCategories |