 |                      |
Forums / Art Talk / Visual Arts Talk / Historically, why has the public received new and innovative work with such reservation?
> 1 <
| Author | Message |
Victory
34 posts |
#23076 2007-09-15 16:49 GMT |
|
Historically, why has the public received new and innovative work with such reservation?
a. the general public is not too smart b. there is little historical context to judge against it c. the work rarely sells to patrons d. they prefer representational art |
|
Eddy
37 posts |
#23077 2007-09-15 16:58 GMT |
|
In addition to possibilities you have listed, there is for most people a conservative streak, that is, they are more comfortable with that which is a known quantity. There is also the fact that all too often, "new" and "innovative" are euphemisms for "garbage."
|
|
Minnie
43 posts |
#23078 2007-09-15 18:29 GMT |
|
It is human nature to resist change.
Change comes slowly in most of the trades that have been around for millenniums. Art is no different. The status quo is what's acceptable to the common man and change is questioned. When most of the questions are answered, ( and this takes time, sometimes decades) then the work is accepted as the norm, it then becomes the status quo and what ever is the next step in the evolution of the trade; whether it is classical music or the visual arts, it will be resisted until the common man's questions are answered. |
|
romeo615
71 posts |
#23079 2007-09-15 19:33 GMT |
|
the public doesn't care about art. they don't have a trained eye to create a constructive dialogue about artworks. aesthetics are always challenged.
|
|
> 1 <
