Discuss or 'It is a common place now that art has ebbed away out of our ordinary life'. Consider if this is wholly true of the present day?'The purpose of education' by Clutton Brock
This is certainly true for my life, at least if we are talking about fine art But I wonder if it is any more true for my life than it would have been for someone similar to me in the past (say 100 years ago).
I do not think I have been inside an art museum/gallery in the last 20 years. I tend to look at what is now called art and think it looks silly. So I do not have nor do I want art in my life.
It also seems to be a commonplace that people in the past had more art in their lives. It is believed that they were more cultured than we are. I really wonder if that is true given that the mass of people had so much less leisure than we do.
At any rate, art has always seemed to me to be the realm of the pretentious. But this is probably because I don't care for or "understand" art. At any rate, I do not have art in my ordinary life and I do not wish things were otherwise.
It is a fact that the origin of all forms of man's artistic productions,like poetry, painting, music etc. has been deeply rooted in the religious instincts of man. In other words, artistic activities of men since the very first days of human civilization have been always inspired and directed by religious ideas. Thus in the case of painting, the earliest specimens of the art have been concerned with the pictures of the gods and goddesses belonging to the pantheon of the religious faiths of the countries of the artists. These gods and goddesses are the highest conceivable embodiments of the painters' sense of the beautiful, the sublime and the noble and the object of these artistic creations is to induce in the mind of man the moral ideas of right and wrong, the ugly and the beautiful, the false and the true and thereby ennoble and elevate the human mind. Such is also the case of poetry and its allied art of music
It was towards the end of the nineteenth century there arose a school of artists in western Europe, called the aesthetics who preached the doctrine of " art for art's sake". What they meant by this is that art exists for its own sake and has nothing to do with life. Consequently, aesthetic pleasure came to be looked upon as the primary object of all artistic creations. Unfortunately, it was little realised that the beauty divorced from the true and the good is no beauty at all.
Modern hurry has, undoubtedly, told upon our sense of art. Nevertheless, prctice of art has not fallen on the wane. Just ask any city-bred child to draw or paint anything of its choice. You will discover, it turns out to be a landscape showing the rising sun, flight of birds, clouds, rivers, trees with fruits and the green as the backdrop. It can scarcely be a drawing of a computer or mobile-phone. Time has not swallowed art, but it is very much dormant within us. That you have raised this issue and I unheart my feelings is because we, who belong to ordinary life, are concerned about art.