When walking through the hopping streets of Manhattan, I came across a pile of items standing on a street corner: a wooden easel with splattered paint colors all over it, a graffitied metal pole with uninterpretable letters on it, and a rolled-up rug. Immediately I saw a variety of different things: art, uncertainty, and trash.
[Picture 1]
I chose this picture to represent what art is because firstly art is completely subjective. What may seem to be art to one person may not be to another. For example, when I took a picture of the art the two workers who were cleaning out a children’s school looked at me with perplexed faces. One of the workers asked, “why are you taking a picture of the trash”. I responded, “this isn’t trash this is art”. The easel raises questions, creates assumptions and arouses emotions differently to its viewers. Art is full of perspectives. As Jerry Saltz says it best, “money is something that can be measured; art is not. It’s all subjective. Some people, like the two workers, see this picture as trash waiting to be picked up by a garbage truck while they walk down the street in NYC. However, I see this picture as something rather beautiful and metaphorical. This picture exemplifies art. I believe I was fortunate to find and take a picture of a wooden easel covered in many colors, showing a youthful tone and an unpredictable pattern. In my perspective, although the wooden easel looks sad and alone, it exemplifies years of happiness, hard work, good use and youth. This easel at one time was used by a young child or children to express their thoughts and emotions and in my mind’s eye, I see a very happy mother looking at her child’s artwork with sheer joy. This easel is an item that symbolizes and is the backbone for art, paintings and drawings etc… When a person uses an easel, it allows one to produce their work in the same plane they are perceiving things. The easel assists in making the artists artwork more precise and therefore profoundly more expressive.
[Picture 2]
The graffiti on the street pole leaves me uncertain due to my not understanding the message trying to be conveyed by its creator, and rather it seems to me that the graffiti was just an act of destruction. The calligrapher only thought of himself when he decided to vandalize the property that belonged to the city. Additionally, I find the graffiti person (I prefer not to use the term artist) somewhat self-centered and arrogant to think that his words need to be permanently seen by all. This metal street sign pole does not ignite a sensual experience that I find unique, perhaps, the person who spray painted the letters onto the pole, looks at this work of art as his personal masterpiece.
[Picture 3]
The picture of the rug is not art to me because it creates no expression of the heart actualized in the real world by any of my senses. It’s a dirty and tattered rug that has no use in the school anymore or anywhere else in the world. It was once a rug that had purpose but no longer can be used or recycled. I just see it as another item that fills our landfills. Thus, art is the completely subjective, honest expressions of the heart actualized into the real world by sensual means.
Andrew Langer
I agree as well in respect to this depiction of graffiti. I will say that there are examples of graffiti I would consider art even though they are also examples of “vandalism.” I’m sure we’ve all seen some gorgeous graffiti murals while driving through the city. But in the case, to me, the graffiti evokes no feeling and offers nothing but the look of something being invalidated. But I agree as well that art is subjective. Someone else may see this pole and see a thing of beauty.
Andrew, I love your statement that “art is full of perspectives.” I think it’s incredibly
accurate. We all see things differently. When looking at the easel, you see a mother looking at her child’s artwork. When I look at the easel, I imagine a frustrated teacher looking at a very satisfied child. Our perceptions are clearly different, yet the easel is art to both of us.
A lot of people would say that graffiti is art, but I think it depends on what the graffiti is.
I would consider a graffiti drawing as art but I don’t think I would consider the lettering on that pole as art. Even though the letter have a cool design/ font to it, the letters seem to just be a tag by the “artist”. I can’t make out either of the words and so the graffiti does not bring out any emotion in me (except for maybe annoyance because the pole now just looks dirty). Im unable to appreciate a creation and therefore do not see it as art.
I really appreciate how you’re open to interpretation of how the easel could be looked at from a mothers point of view because if you could appreciate an art piece through others perspective that opens up more discussion on the art piece and even a better outlook on life. Furthermore, your definition of art is great because a person senses are really important when defining art but it has to come from a real place, a place which shows a persons’ essence. That place is the heart.
Hey Andrew, I really like what you said in regards to the second photograph. The definition of art is so vague and it definitely doesn’t help that the same thing can mean so many different things to different people. It is said that if something is meaningful to at least one person, it can be considered art. In that sense, the fact that the graffiti most likely meant something to the person that created it makes it plausibly a work of art.
Hi Andrew,
I also took a picture of graffiti for my second picture as well. I also was going back and forth on whether it was a form of destruction of property or a type of art. I think even if the morals of the artist was not the best, it does show a sense of art because it’s conveying a message. Maybe we can’t interpret it clearly, but it might be trying to say something to someone or society. I also love your first picture because to some people they might not consider the painting on the easel art. Although to the artist, it could have a message they’re trying to convey or emotions they’re trying to pour out on the canvas. Overall, great job!
Andrew, I totally agree with your idea behind the second photo. The idea of the artist’s ignorance and self centered mind set. Also the fact that you can’t understand what the message is also a huge factor of trying to convey if it really is art. However, I just want to state that this might not be art to people like me and you but maybe to the artist this may convey a huge message and it might be him/her spreading his form of “art.” Also, just want to state that the first photo with the painting, the painting is absolutely beautiful and I don’t understand why anyone would throw it out.
I completely agree with your thoughts on this photograph and do not think I could have explained it better myself. I do not consider this to be art either. When it comes to graffiti, sometimes the drawings are vibrant and exciting, but I think that the people who do graffiti forget that the objects they are drawing on do not belong to them. (I agree with not using the term artist). They might be “in the zone” and express their feelings, but the object they’re coloring on has value to someone else and it isn’t their place to go and destruct it.