I consider myself a person who appreciates art. I’ve always made an attempt to expand my knowledge and expose myself to different forms of art as much as I can. I know that art is hard to classify and even harder define. But the extent of ambiguity really hit me in Copenhagen. Yesterday we visited the National Gallery, and we saw an incredible collection of art that fell on polar ends of the spectrum.
There was a large modern art exhibit, and it was amazing the kinds of work that made it there. Not only is the viewer left to decipher the meaning, but also more broadly contemplate its artistic value. For example, one of the exhibits was a dirty plastic lawn chair beside a cut out cardboard box. This unusual form of art leads me to ask some questions. Like, why is this chair of any more value than one I own? What did the artist do to distinguish this chair? What inspired this work? And how has it come to accrue value?
And I think that’s the incredible thing about art. The only constant is that it will lead you to ask these questions, and often not be able to come up with any answers. Brian mentioned that he thinks art becomes reputable when someone portrays something in a way that no one has thought to do before. I completely agree.
Also, it’s amazing how art can capture culture and depict a people’s lifestyle. This gallery had their less modern art divided by gorgraphical location. The pieces differed greatly. The color schemes correlated to climate and the subjects were to true to that region.