What defines Art and who says?

by Emma

A very controversial subject but one which I feels is continous and ever evolving in debate. Like art itself, it has no beginning, nor does it have an end. I was discussing the concept of abstract art with my significant other today. I am not an artist. I do not draw and my painting resembles that of a 3 year old. However, I do feel I am perceptive and imaginative to appreciate creativity in its varied form. What I cannot find appreciation in, is art which, to my eye, resembles nothing or is questionable in content and context. I visited a gallery recently, and was amazed to see a green canvas displayed on the wall. Simply green. My significant other would argue that it is conceptual, and the perception is varied. I would debate that it is not unique and is simply a bland colour painted mundanely onto paper. Am I viewing this with a closed mind? Or is art simply created and expected to convey perception, without the form to appreciate? If this is the case, then give me a brush, and I will paint a masterpiece. I do say this tongue in cheek as I know how much work and energy does go into creating a piece. I fully appreciate intricacy, expression and originality. However, I do wish to be inspired and awed by what I view. I can create imagery solely, so a simple blank canvas is not going to further inspire my imagination.


Thus saying, I love art. I love the journey it can create. I thrive on the mindset which it can allure. My questioning mind simply ponders on ‘who defines it’?

If art creates feeling, I’m feeling it. If art creates pondering, hell, I will ponder. If art creates beauty, I will be appreciating. If art gives me nothing, then my reaction will remain aloof.

As with life, I want to be inspired. I want to feel, see, touch, and experience. Is that not what motivates us? Just saying :p

The mind of a deep thinker…or complete rubbish…it is all down to interpretation and perception…