Response to todays lecture

In response to our discussion today, I was thinking about this idea of art historians being as important as the art itself and I came up with some gaps in this logic. The majority of art presently is not taught in academic setting. New styles and types of art are constantly evolving, which makes it almost impossible for the art historian to keep up. Digital visionary art for example, is not going to be discussed in a school setting…unless its Naropa or something. Also I feel the individual response to art is subjective. This subjective response to a work may be common or not, but either way it is legitment. Therefore the art, the artist  and the viewer have accomplished something unique the art historian may never discuss. Most art is not found in a formal gallery or school setting at all, but in the homes of artists, their friends, and underground venues.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: