A non art object can easily be transformed into a work of art. Through the medium of photography and the dark room, an everyday object such as a baby fence, can turn into a crisp black and white image. With the correct use of shutter speed and aperture artistic techniques can be applied in the photograph to change a mundane object into something visually stimulating and aesthetically appealing. Photography can capture a moment in time, document an item, even tell a story. An artist can manipulate an object and have it be perceived as whatever he wants. Just because the creator calls it art, does it make it so? What constitutes art and who verifies this claim? Is photography even a form of art, or a form of documentation? These questions have arisen through out the art world debate and yet no answer can be concluded as "the one".
On the other hand, can art be functional? Recycling last week's project I made a bow tie out of game dice. This "tie dye" actually acts as a bow tie that closes a button up dress shirt. Here a piece of art becomes functional. At first I thought it would be hard to find art that is also functional, but when taking a closer look and doing some research, I actually realized that many utilitarian objects in life can also be called art. Furniture, electronics, clothes, houses, and much more, are all designed by artists. Creative thought goes into the creation of each object, it has to take into account who uses the object and how they use it. In a sense, the creators of utilitarian objects go through the same process as an artist creating art work. And just as art is put on show, everyday objects are critiqued and scrutinized when going on sale. Both art and functional items are determined successful by the public's reaction. Whose to say that art and utilitarian object are all that different.
No comments:
Post a Comment