Previously I’ve mentioned including the artist’s name when posting artwork but today, instead of fiddling with Wikipedia, I thought I’d go the extra pedantic mile here and write about artwork citation.

The MLA and Chicago Manual of Style give the basic format for artwork citation as:

• Artist name
• Title of the work in italics (or underlined, but not in quotes)
• Date it was created (or n.d. if date is not available)
• Repository, museum, or owner followed by the location of the institution

Example note citation:

Mark Rothko, Number 22, 1969, Museum of Modern Art, New York.

Read More

I would answer this in three ways, first, each individual can decide for her/himself on what constitutes art to them. Second, the larger question of what is art to the community or culture  will vary depending on the culture, for example, consider African, Asian, Eskimo, Chinese, Western art etc. And third, whether or not “everything can be considered art” I think should be answered yes it can.  However, much of the ‘art’ would not interest most people - nor should it. So, in my opinion, it’s not an absolute question, is or isn’t it art, but rather a question of quality and meaningfulness within its cultural context.

Consider artist Lawrence Weiner who is selling his “immaterial ideas.” His piece “2 Metal Balls + 2 Metal Rings (Set Down in the Grove)” consists of those words painted on the floor of the gallery. If you were to purchase his work, for $160,000 US, you don’t get the lettering, nor do you get the 3-D work it implies, you get only Weiner’s idea, simply the meaning of the words. He has created art but the question is whether or not his work is of interest or value – depends on your point of view. I say kudos to Weiner - he’s got a great art dealer.

photo by Lucy Hogg

It occurred to me (no doubt I’m not the first to think of this) that some Tumblr blogs could be considered art forms in and of themselves. Specifically those blogs with multiple images spread across the screen as a collage or patchwork of images. Felix Inclusis is the best example I am aware of. He/she uses a color theme with every day/group of images. At the very least that blog is art.

agree/disagree, other blogs worthy of art form status?

Unrelated - viewing color artwork in the dashboard can change the appearance of the work due to the strong blue background. I saw a painting I really liked, uploaded it and viewed it on the dash and was wondering what changed - it’s the blasted blue background, something to keep in mind.

I’ve been thinking about attempting to better answer the question of why the Cy Twombly piece is important. This has led me instead to formulate my own personal definition of ‘good art’. Here goes, to me the value of art, or how good I think a piece is, can be measured by how much time the viewer wishes to invests in that piece. Take for example a van Gogh self-portrait, I can spend quite a bit of time following his flow of brushstrokes around and across the painting, examining and absorbing his technique, design, color, intensity and emotion. Standing in front of a well done painting can provide hours and even years of emotional and/or intellectual stimulation. So for me the measure of excellence of a work of art is in essentially how much a particular piece gives to me. Excellent artwork is a sort of store of the artist’s abilities, insight and humanity. All, or least some, of what the artist puts into a painting I can then later draw out.  And I think great art has layers of value. A simple design layer that delivers a quick image rush to the casual viewer and then an ever deeper complexity of image and meaning that is revealed as the viewer invests more time in the work.

Other ideas of what good art is?

I was wondering if the occasional nude painting or drawing that can be seen on this blog offends anyone? After so many figure drawing classes as well as just looking at art for so long I don’t even notice anymore but I’d like to know what others think.

Addendum: Does it mater whether or not it’s male or female nudity?

I just came across someone who reblogged a post and in so doing removed credit to the artist. As it is a lot of people don’t give credit when they post but removing credit is inexcusable. 

Pleeeeeeease  - everybody - don’t forget to give credit to artists.  The artist’s name should be in the caption - it’s only fair - and just providing a source link is not a substitute.

Addendum: A link is not a substitute! If you visit a museum, look in a magazine, think of anyplace a work of art is on display (other than commercial work) the artist is always credited with the piece. It’s that simple. It’s what the artists want and there is no substitute. Would it make sense when you’re visiting a museum to have a card next to the painting that says, “call this number if you want to find out who the artist is,” of course not. It’s ridiculous to even suggest it. But again, THE ARTIST WANTS CREDIT!