An interesting article from the Guardian: Britain’s photographic revolution
It reports that the big art institutions in Britain are finally embracing photography as a legitimate art form. It discusses how America embraced photography so enthusiastically in the mid 20th century with the social and economic reasons why. It also cites examples of private London galleries having held photography exhibitions for several years and that the ‘big guns’, like the Tate, are only now catching up with contemporary art photography.
The article also touches on the value of art photography and how sale prices have risen, citing this as evidence that photography is now being taken seriously. This makes me sad.
Continue reading The value of art: scarcity over merit
I’ve been pondering over the difference between beauty and art in what I, and other “artists”, do. Now, clearly a lot depends on your definition of art. My definition of art is something which has been created or arranged in such a manner as to try to stimulate emotions and thoughts. I think this can be generally simplified into the statement that ‘art should say something’. I think beauty on the other hand, does not need to say anything, it just is; or isn’t, depending on the eye of the beholder.
Another thing I recently heard somewhere is that art has no purpose other than as art. This is another way in which I think art differs from beauty, because I think beauty can be expressed in more ways than just one (aesthetics); in that, something can be done in a beautiful way. I have realised that a lot of the things I like in life, I like because they are beautiful in more ways than one.
Continue reading Beauty and art