When I was younger, I used to think of Picasso's work as being scribbles - if a child could recreate it, then it was definitely not art. (Did anyone else feel the same?)
Yet, at that time, I didn't know about Picasso's work as an artist prior to his cubist artworks.
 |
| The Old Guitarist |
 |
| The Kiss |
For the record, I'm not a huge fan of Picasso. However, I feel is a tricky standard to apply consistently. Just for example, given the proper equipment, a child could recreate virtually any famous photograph. Just tell them where to point and flip on auto-focus. Is photography still art? Perhaps only those photos which require attention beyond a child's capabilities -- but such obstacles are almost purely technical, and unrelated to the art itself. The most difficult to make photos aren't necessarily the best.
ReplyDeleteIt's all centered on intentionality. Not much more can be said in this space. (Well, nothing except this: I suspect John Cage might disagree about intentionality, but he'd be wrong. Traffic would not be music if people were literally deaf to traffic, or if not one person heard it as such.)