Art: Is it better to be interpreted, or should it be an interpretation of the artist?

9 Answers

Relevance
  • 1 decade ago
    Favorite Answer

    Both.

    Art is the artist's viewpoint, his interpretation of the subject. So he give his opinion of the subject via the artwork.

    The audience (those viewing the 'art') will also have their own opinions of the subject, even though they are only observing it through the artist's eyes.

    Everyone has his or her own interpretation because of his/her different experiences in life, and values and attitude.

    Artists may use their media to give their opinions, to show the audience what they see, to help the viewer see the world in a different, new, way.

    I believe that it would be almost impossible to create, and view a piece of art in a totally objective manner. Even if you did try to it may not happen, as your own subconscious internal dialogue would render the effort useless! Of course, you wouldn't 'know' that you're not objective....you would just be.

    So I think that there's no 'better' way. Art is the interpretation of the artist, AND it is the interpretation of the viewer!!

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • MUD
    Lv 5
    1 decade ago

    In a sense the ultimate interpretation is probably in the mind of the artist but I like to think art is meant to be shared. Since each of us brings different experiences to what we are seeing I think ever interpretation can be the "real" or right one.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    Art is created by the artist to be viewed in a certain way, but it is always open to interpretation. Even when there is a blurb describing the artists intentions and motivations, a viewer will draw on there own life experiences and relate them to the subject in question.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    It is better be felt than interpreted, it is not necessary an interpretation of the artist.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    by interpreting the art, you're interpreting the artist.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    I FEEL ART SHOULD BE AN INTERPERTATION OF THE ARTIST , WHICH IN RETURN WILL ALLOW THE BUYER TO INTERPRETE ITS OWN FEELINGS AND THOUGHTS BEHIND THE PORTRAIT, BESIDES A PICTURE IS WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • art shouldn't be interpretated...it should always be original. no one can draw/perform the art as good as the person who invented it

    Source(s): my opinion
    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • Anonymous
    1 decade ago

    Art is in the eye of the beholder.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
  • 1 decade ago

    In my opinion, great art does not provide answers; it asks new questions.

    • Commenter avatarLogin to reply the answers
Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.