I spent six years working at a local art museum, where they had a regular roster of contemporary art exhibitions. There were some that I enjoyed having the opportunity to go look at and get to know whenever I needed a break from my computer. And then there were some that I simply did not understand and barely looked in the gallery. That said, my job was membership when I frequently heard feedback from visitors who expressed many varied opinions about each show. It really made me see a value of art is how no one sees it the same way - even if they shared that appreciation. One person could like it because of the color. Another because of the technique. Another because of the story it told. Some people liked art because of how it spoke to them. And others liked the art because of how it spoke to others about what they knew. Personally, I preferred to hear the former - even if we didn't share the same point of view.
Personally, I really like Shakespeare. I know that has a lot to do with the fact I was in a production when I was 18 and it was just one of those magical experiences when everyone became friends and we laughed until our insides hurt. A number of his plays are comfort food for me. I can see the basic story of Hamlet, Henry V, or Romeo & Juliet in a lot of modern stories and films. But I know it is just like those exhibits. Everyone sees those works differently - some with love, some with disinterest, and some with a desire to be seen for what they know.
I appreciate this post. I think the fact I enjoyed those conversations at the museum is because I ultimately find it fascinating how we all see art differently, as we see the world differently. And sometimes hearing those reflections can shift my view a little bit so I can get a glimpse of a color or recognize a technique that I didn't let myself see in my tunnel vision.
Jesse...I constantly try to explain to people who aren't around a lot of art or artists and really don't understand what their experience can be like exactly what you just said: You can meet it on your own terms. Actually, that's exactly how you should meet it--with your own personal experience, likes, and dislikes. If someone doesn't like Shakespeare or Titian, but is drawn to folk art or outlier art, society tends to make them feel inferior or put down. (There is definitely a hierarchy with some in the visual arts, with oil painters on top, then farther down the water colorists, then at the bottom, gasp! illustrators. There is no worse insult than calling someone an illustrator.) I can't stand a gallery that puts on the chic. That doesn't mean the viewer doesn't have a responsibility in all of this to be open and receptive. There's nothing more that I like than walking out of an exhibit and saying, what the hell was that? You have to first believe and trust that the artist made the piece in good faith.
I spent six years working at a local art museum, where they had a regular roster of contemporary art exhibitions. There were some that I enjoyed having the opportunity to go look at and get to know whenever I needed a break from my computer. And then there were some that I simply did not understand and barely looked in the gallery. That said, my job was membership when I frequently heard feedback from visitors who expressed many varied opinions about each show. It really made me see a value of art is how no one sees it the same way - even if they shared that appreciation. One person could like it because of the color. Another because of the technique. Another because of the story it told. Some people liked art because of how it spoke to them. And others liked the art because of how it spoke to others about what they knew. Personally, I preferred to hear the former - even if we didn't share the same point of view.
Personally, I really like Shakespeare. I know that has a lot to do with the fact I was in a production when I was 18 and it was just one of those magical experiences when everyone became friends and we laughed until our insides hurt. A number of his plays are comfort food for me. I can see the basic story of Hamlet, Henry V, or Romeo & Juliet in a lot of modern stories and films. But I know it is just like those exhibits. Everyone sees those works differently - some with love, some with disinterest, and some with a desire to be seen for what they know.
I appreciate this post. I think the fact I enjoyed those conversations at the museum is because I ultimately find it fascinating how we all see art differently, as we see the world differently. And sometimes hearing those reflections can shift my view a little bit so I can get a glimpse of a color or recognize a technique that I didn't let myself see in my tunnel vision.
Jesse...I constantly try to explain to people who aren't around a lot of art or artists and really don't understand what their experience can be like exactly what you just said: You can meet it on your own terms. Actually, that's exactly how you should meet it--with your own personal experience, likes, and dislikes. If someone doesn't like Shakespeare or Titian, but is drawn to folk art or outlier art, society tends to make them feel inferior or put down. (There is definitely a hierarchy with some in the visual arts, with oil painters on top, then farther down the water colorists, then at the bottom, gasp! illustrators. There is no worse insult than calling someone an illustrator.) I can't stand a gallery that puts on the chic. That doesn't mean the viewer doesn't have a responsibility in all of this to be open and receptive. There's nothing more that I like than walking out of an exhibit and saying, what the hell was that? You have to first believe and trust that the artist made the piece in good faith.