Depending on how it is portrayed and explained, a child’s amateur collage could be transformed into a work of art that is complex, deep, and enigmatic. If you step back and simply look at it, it’s a piece of construction paper with paper triangles and circles sloppily glued on, and it might be your personal opinion that it’s a disgrace to call such a project a piece of art, a masterpiece even.
But to some, the carelessly assembled work might represent the ephemeral nature of childhood, the standard sky blue color of the background might express the utility and potential of such a common color, and the lone star shape in the corner could represent the North Star that guided the escaped slaves. But that’s just me.
When you try to interpret Picasso’s Guernica, it’s probably easy to infer what scene he’s trying to depict, given that you are familiar with his background. It’s showing the personal horror and trauma that arose from the German and Italian bombing of his Spanish town. You might know from common knowledge or shallow research that the Spanish government paid Picasso to create this mural for the World Fair that took place in Paris.
However, a more prevalent trend has been lurking in the most recent years. Especially as abstract art becomes more common and there are less distinguishing factors that allow you to identify what an artist is trying to convey, the artists are becoming increasingly reliant on art fanatics’ creativity, imagination and personal interpretation skills to properly appreciate their art. Research will only get you so far, and personal analysis will bring you the rest of the way.
Thus, what people do with their money is their own business. For some reason I’ve never been able to awaken a very strong interest or passion in visual art as most other people, as it doesn’t affect me emotionally, at all. But I do know that there are people that exist that base their careers on their appreciation for art. Some people are willing to spend millions on something that looks like 3rd-grade me could have created, and for what reason exactly? Personal appreciation is a phenomenon that I doubt I will ever understand.
But as is my opinion with music, so too shall this apply to art: you don’t need to agree with someone’s lifestyle to appreciate their work. Stop hating on Chris Brown’s music. We’re not downloading his albums to listen to him talk about his ethics and morals; it might just be that I really like the loud bass to one of his songs, in which case if I decide to download a Chris Brown song, no one should judge me because I’m obviously not going to take life lessons from him.
As is the case with someone like Justin Bieber. His “beliebers” firmly believe that he is flawless, but I personally find many character flaws that I don’t want to go into detail about because I might just spend five paragraphs on it (if you really want me to, comment below and I’m happy to write a separate post about it) >:D
In my opinion Justin Bieber is overrated as a person but I really do believe (though I will reluctantly admit) that he has raw talent as a singer. Thus, I don’t feel guilty downloading his music.
As it pertains to art, I believe it’s totally to appreciate (and heck, if you have/are willing to spend money) and purchase someone’s art simply for aesthetic reasons. As long as you are comfortable with your financial decision, you should feel free to do whatever you want. You have nothing to prove to anyone…
Not only that, but it’s also acceptable to enjoy someone’s work for different reasons. While we have professional art analyzers that may or may not be right about the meaning behind someone’s art, isn’t the point of this whole experience for the artist (and indirectly, the viewer) to explore the work and their own creativity? Thus, you can probably interpret a song or a painting or a sculpture differently than everyone else seems to, and that justifies your appreciation/purchase. If you find something profound in art, there’s nothing that should hold you back from expressing your admiration of it.