What's Art?

On a photo forum I frequent, someone was talking about how some people find his photo interesting while others hate it. This is something I wrote in response.

This is true to all modern art. I think it was so before, but the audience was much more limited in size and scope.

As you said, it's in the eye of the beholder. But does that mean it's all that counts? If the mass appeal, the approval from the mass, and the money are important, maybe so. The creators need to think about who's going to appreciate their works.

But the creation is for (mostly) your own sake, for expressing your view of things, then it really doesn't matter what others think. If people like your creation, that's good. If not, well, you can always say the world is not ready for you.

This got a bit more apparent in the development of abstract arts. Often times, what the creators intended and what the audience saw were totally different. Before it was much easier to agree on the commonality of the two parties, reflected on the work.

This discrepancy, I think, is perfectly fine. In recent years, the artistic expression has been going toward the individual's inner world, and that must be as diverse as the individual herself.

Of course, one can talk about techniques and rules. But those are just a guidance that tells you what would work for most people, most of the times (that is, what's still largely shared among our psyches). I don't think one shouldn't be too much concerned with it if the self expression is the most important criteria.

Hong.