It just so happens that one of the distinguishing factors, art, that separates the human race, from possibly every other form of life on Earth, is also one of the most subjective phenomenon in existence. What is considered art? What is considered meaningless matter? How are they different? Sure, there is a definition, but how do we know it’s the right one? What qualifies it as the objective reality that one seeks when questioning the meaning of art?Through various observations from this assignment, I’ve been able to identify several points on the spectrum of art: art that is meant to be appreciated for its beauty and/or intricacy as well as abstractness, and art that is emotionally stimulating, and the frequent combination of both.
The first photograph above, a depiction of what I would consider to be art, is the statue of Bernard M. Baruch, located near the entrance of Baruch College. Being that Baruch was a man of several occupations and talents, of which two involve finance and investing, his statue is an example of art that expresses a specific meaning, particularly that represents some of the core academic values of the institution. The statue itself is a physical structure that serves the purpose of conveying emotion, or in this case, the origin of the financial leaning of the college, and therefore is a work of art.
The second picture above depicts an aged piece of chewed gum on one of New York City’s busy sidewalks. Though itself can easily be considered a superfluous object, possibly deposited onto the sidewalk by somebody in a rush, the photograph can be argued to be a work of art for its emotional appeal. The photo of a chewed-up piece of gum can represent the mundane, yet active cycle of daily life in the urban streets of the city. The dark color, for example, can resemble the length of time that the gum may have spent on the ground while being walked over by countless people going about their day. Though it possibly can be considered a work of art, the object was not crafted with the intent to convey any sort of message or meaning, so the question of this photo being art still lies.
The third photo above shows an average fault of New York City’s crumbling infrastructure. At first glance, one can conclude that this photo, or rather, the concrete, does not present any artistic significance as determined by two general premises: it was not created with the intent to be appreciated for its aesthetic qualities, that is, it wasn’t created intentionally at all, and it doesn’t communicate any emotional substance. Looking at the ground was not thought provoking, and I found the broken concrete rather unappealing, which made it easier to come to the conclusion that maybe it was just that, broken concrete, and not art.
I’ve come to the conclusion that art is self-expression, or really expression of anything, through a tangible, or audible medium. As it relates to the aforementioned “spectrum,” if it’s art, it should be thought provoking, and as a general matter, should take more time to think about, or observe than it takes to check the time on your phone.
Ronald Osherov
Hello, I would like to start by agreeing with your introductory statements; art is essential for human life in order to separate ourselves from beasts, and yet no one can definitively say what is and is not art. Your photo of Bernard M Baruch is definitely art; a statue that was created to inspire students like us, as well as commemorate our namesake, is a meaningful piece of artwork. However, I believe both your second and third photos can also be considered art. The photos are both showcasing life in NYC. The gum that has quite literally become a part of the NYC streets, and a crack that is the result of thousands of people walking along the street over years – they can be seen as gross or a lack of infrastructure, or they can be seen as symbolic of how many people from all over the world have stepped over the same gum or crack, embedding them into the streets that we all walk on today. These contrasting views, in my opinion, just go to show how unique our definitions of art can be, and how truly indescribable art is.