STUDENT POSTt: What is Good Art?

by: Jay Freerking, undergraduate art history student

There are pieces of art all over the world. There is art dating back to earlier than the 1200’s all the way up to present day. There are hundreds museums all across the world displaying these pieces of art. Out of all that art in the world, what is “good” art and what is “bad” art? What defines “good” or “bad” art? There are many different areas that art is analyzed. It is analyzed by the historical significance, the formal characteristics, subject, meaning and many other things. If one of these areas has a flaw the piece of art could be considered “bad” art. For example, if there was a painting that didn’t have any historical significance and the color and lines were badly done, that painting could be called “bad” art. Let’s review some pieces of art to demonstrate.

First we’ll discuss one of the most well known paintings in the world, Leonardo Da Vinci’s Mona Lisa. Da Vinci most likely used Lisa Gherardini del Giocondo as a model for this painting. He used a lightly tinted varnish on this painting to give it that smoky haze, also known as sfumato.

This painting is most known for her smile. Some people have said that when they are in the presence of this painting the eyes almost follow them around the room. That is because the times during the period that this was painting weren’t the greatest. At first glance this woman looks happy but looking closer the viewer can see that there is something on this woman’s mind. She is thinking about all the hardships that she has to deal with. She looks at peace but her mind is obviously racing. The subject matter and significance are what makes this piece “good” art.

Now what if I said that the Mona Lisa was “bad” art? Would you believe me? As far as formal characteristics go, her neck too long for her body. People rave about her smile but I don’t see any smile. I can see the fact that she is not in peace. Is she sitting in front of a window overlooking the country side? This piece of art does deserve credit, but it also has some flaws.

Next we’ll discuss Marcel Duchamp’s Fountain. Duchamp took an already made urinal and turned it 90 degrees and put the words “R. Mutt” onto the side of the urinal. He did this with a play on the manufacture’s name.

He submitted this piece to the American Society of Independent Artists. The majority of the members in that society turned the piece away saying that this wasn’t art and refused to put it into an exhibit. They said that this wasn’t art because the urinal was manufactured by another company. The only thing that Duchamp changed on it was the name on the side. It is evident that the Society believed during that time period that art was something that an artist created from scratch and build or painted the piece for themselves. To the Society this was “bad” art.

However, Duchamp’s Fountain can also be considered “good” art. With Duchamp’s Fountain being rejected, an artistic question was raised. Does art have to be completely manufactured and thought up by an artist? Or can an artist take an object that has already been made and alter it to make a piece of art? Does it matter to the Society that Duchamp had a meaning behind the Fountain? He said that “Whether Mr. Mutt with his own hands made the Fountain or not has no importance. He CHOSE it. He took an ordinary article of life, placed it so that its useful significance disappeared under the new title and point of view – created a new thought for that object” It is taking a common thing and putting a new twist in it.

The next piece that I want to discuss is Piet Mondrian’s Composition with Red, Blue, and Yellow painted in 1930. The piece is made with balance in mind. This is shown that even though the red is larger on the right side, the blue in the lower left balances things out in the painting. This piece can be considered “good” art because of this balance. It doesn’t seem to be too heavy. Mondrian wanted to get back to basics. He thought that artists were getting too far away from the idea of basic art. He wanted to use the primary colors and grey, white, and black to showcase the use of balance. It also symbolizes the balance of conflict between males and females, individuals and society, and spiritual and material.

On the other hand, Composition with Red, Blue and Yellow could also be considered “bad” art. The context of this piece seems so elementary. Anyone can paint between the lines. The artist’s full talent and ability are not shown in this piece of art. What significance does this piece have in history?

Out of all three pieces of art there is not a single one that is flawless. As much as an artist tries to make the perfect piece of art, it can’t happen. There is almost always something that is going to conflict on whether it is a “good” or “bad” piece of art. The majority of the characteristics will take over and it can be determined whether something should be “good” or “bad”. However, it is human nature the find the flaw in something, before seeing the good. That is why a lot of opinions about art are subjective.

As we discussed about the Mona Lisa, yes her smile is famous but I don’t quite see a smile in that painting. If I were to tell a friend who had never heard or seen than painting before that it was the worst painting in the world and they shouldn’t even waste their time seeing it, I would have tainted their opinion. They are now going to go around telling people they know that the painting sucks even though it doesn’t suck. There are also a lot of people out there that are turned away by one bad thing. Some people see a work of art that was just poorly put together, and then they automatically assume all art is bad. It is all subjective. The only thing that I can ask is that you go out and visit art galleries and museums to get your own opinion about a work of art.

Here is a website with some information about Good vs. Bad Art.