Comments on Gerhard Richter

A lot of the art and movements that we’ve looked at in this class so far have been in some way moving away

from aesthetic beauty, seeing it as a hindrance to both the artistic process and final product. This is something I do not agree with, so I appreciate that Richter helped to reintroduce the importance of visually appealing work. All art is meant for an audience, it needs a response, art is something in need for evaluation. But I think the true marker for artwork that lives on is something that can be at least somewhat accessible to a majority of people. I see it more of a hindrance to produce art that that alienates the artist and the work, by creating pieces that are supposed to disgust, shock, etc. Of course these works have a some deeper meaning that they’re trying to get across. However, the way that they choose to do it I think ends up taking center stage and in the end the viewer doesn’t really remember the reason why that piece/work was made. I think it’s easier to shock and get an immediate response but the challenge, I think, is in creating something that can both strike a chord emotionally and also take into consideration  the visual appearance. I think the true challenge of creating any type of art is in the balance between aesthetically pleasing work and messaging an idea, concept, etc. Obviously, not all people in the art world share this opinion, nonetheless I was really enjoyed today’s lecture.

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: