I found that I could easily relate to the content of this article, like some of the others before it. I keep finding myself drawing parallels between the thoughts regarding the contemporary art scene and the academic field of architecture I am investigating at the Knowlton School. This discourse between Stephen Metcalf and Michael Kimmelman explores and wrestles with some of the issues that frustrate me when it comes to design related subjects. Metcalf touches on the subject almost immediately. From my understanding, a common opinion existing in the world today is that art is only meant to be understood by a select few and that many people feel they lack the qualifications to interpret it. The result is that art has become the lifestyle for the rich and over-educated, when even they might not understand it. The result is that many people, who don't "get it" from their initial encounter with a design piece, simply shrug their shoulders (both figuratively and literally) and choose to turn away instead of attempting to understand what is sitting in front of them. They treat things objectively rather than subjectively, as Metcalf states, and base their decisions on what a "higher" authority tells them. Kimmelman echoes my sentiments saying that people who exist outside of the art world just assume that it isn't meant for them.
I found it interesting that Kimmelman notes that more people visit art museums than ballgames. I never would have thought this to be true based on my experience with other people's reactions towards art or architecture they do not understand. But maybe he is correct in that these people are looking for something from art but do not know what they are looking for. I enjoyed this back and forth discussion but did not know many of the references that Kimmelman and Metcalf were relating to so I could not delve any deeper into what they were discussing.
No comments:
Post a Comment