Who determines whether art is good or bad?
A recent series of comments in response to a story on musician Gretchen Seichrist had me wondering, when do you know something is a bad work of art, as opposed to simply not to your personal taste? And who ultimately gets to decide what art is truly good?
As I usually do when pondering an arts related question, I posted it on Facebook to see what sort of answers I might get (I count approximately 1500 Minnesota artsy types among my FB friends).
The responses I got were, as ever, thoughtful, probing and witty. So I thought I'd share some of them with you.
Since the question is a two-parter, I'll break down the answers respectively:
Create a More Connected Minnesota
MPR News is your trusted resource for the news you need. With your support, MPR News brings accessible, courageous journalism and authentic conversation to everyone - free of paywalls and barriers. Your gift makes a difference.
How do you determine good art from bad? Or from art that's simply not to your taste?
Actress Linda Sue Anderson mused: "Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart said about pornography "I know it when I see it." Perhaps the same is true for "bad" art?"
Poet Kathryn Kysar answered: "Skill and craft can make it good art, even if I don't like the style."
Artist Deborah Foutch wrote:
Art that connects is successful. Sometimes the connection is beauty sometimes it's repellent & there is a lot of stuff in between these extremes but Art that fills the eye, or ears but leaves you with "eh" feeling is unsuccessful.
In a similar vein, writer Jacquie Fuller offered:
When I think of bad art, I think of Milan Kundera's definition of kitsch in "The Unbearable Lightness of Being." In bad art, "all answers are given in advance and preclude any questions."
On the more humorous side, photographer Paul Shambroom wrote:
Simple. If it's in the Museum of Bad Art (http://www.museumofbadart.org/) it's bad. If it's in any other museum, it's good (or someone important thinks it is.) And if it's not in any museum at all it might be genius.
And finally arts educator Bonnie Schock suggests "this depends entirely upon how we define the function of art in society."
Who decides what is good art?
Poet William Reichard's response: "You get to determine what is good and bad art. It's completely subjective. You can trust 'authorities' to make these judgements for you, but it's much more fun to make them yourself."
Sculptor Jim Larson suggested "those who get to determine great art have skillfully maneuvered themselves into those positions."
Poet Leslie Adrienne Miller believes "a society's artists collectively decide good art from bad over time, though individuals with authority at any given moment sometimes think they are the deciders."
and finally Nimbus Theater director Josh Cragun offered this explanation:
The answer is simple: every single person who partakes in creating or consuming [art]. What is profound, beautiful, or mind-opening depends on each individual, their language, upbringing, experiences, and more. The idea that something must be universally acclaimed to be good is a fallacy at best, and perhaps more accurately, a destructive distraction.
That doesn't mean that the conversation about what is important has no value, however. Our evaluations of art are reflections of who we are and how we perceive the world, and exchanging these perceptions is one of the most crucial tools we have in coming to understand both each other and the world in which we live in.
So, what do you think? Have anything you'd like to add to the thoughts above? Share them in the comments section.