Jerry Saltz
After reading the article "The Whole Ball of Wax" by Jerry Saltz, it is clear that his views on the topic of art are different from those who feel as though art can change the world. Instead of having that viewpoint, Saltz compares numerous different critics and their opinions to come up with an analogy in the end relating art to a cat. Ultimately, through the examination of multiple artists and critics, Saltz comes up with his view of art being one that has the ability to influence change throughout the world. Art is more than something that is enjoyable to look at visually. Instead, Saltz comes to the conclusion that art is "part of a universal force" (Saltz), and is meant to be an experience.
Throughout reading this article, I agreed with a great deal of what Saltz was saying. Being someone who enjoys learning about art and enjoys creating art, I too feel as though art is more than just a simplistic piece of material. Art is most definitely, in my opinion, meant to inflict a certain feeling or message into the person who is observing it. Especially dating back to when art was just becoming popular and more known, people used art as a getaway or a way for them to experience something that reached far beyond basic feeling. For example, someone who fought during a World War might utilize art to decompose, or even to reflect, especially after undergoing such strenuous experiences.
One thing that caused me to reread the end of this article multiple times would be the analogy that Saltz used when comparing art to a cat. I understand that what he is trying to get his readers to understand is that art is complicated, much like cats tend to be. However, in terms of the the communication aspect of that analogy, the communication between the cat and the human, somewhere I got lost in following what he was trying to get across. Yet overall, I feel as though I have a solid grasp of what Saltz was getting at throughout the previous sections of the article; being that art is something more complex and greater than just something visually pleasing for people to gaze at.
Throughout reading this article, I agreed with a great deal of what Saltz was saying. Being someone who enjoys learning about art and enjoys creating art, I too feel as though art is more than just a simplistic piece of material. Art is most definitely, in my opinion, meant to inflict a certain feeling or message into the person who is observing it. Especially dating back to when art was just becoming popular and more known, people used art as a getaway or a way for them to experience something that reached far beyond basic feeling. For example, someone who fought during a World War might utilize art to decompose, or even to reflect, especially after undergoing such strenuous experiences.
One thing that caused me to reread the end of this article multiple times would be the analogy that Saltz used when comparing art to a cat. I understand that what he is trying to get his readers to understand is that art is complicated, much like cats tend to be. However, in terms of the the communication aspect of that analogy, the communication between the cat and the human, somewhere I got lost in following what he was trying to get across. Yet overall, I feel as though I have a solid grasp of what Saltz was getting at throughout the previous sections of the article; being that art is something more complex and greater than just something visually pleasing for people to gaze at.
I agree with what you wrote about in your blog. We talked in class about how art is more than just a pretty piece of work and also both mentioned in our blogs how it is meant to evoke an emotion or thought. Nice job!
ReplyDelete