THE ART OF CREATION

Mark Rothko, an American artist who described himself as an “abstract painter”, once said about art that he was not the kind of person interested in the relationship of form, color or similars. He didn’t define himself as an abstractionist, but rather as a person interested only in expressing basic human emotions such as doom, tragedy, ecstasy and so on. This was one person’s vision of art, but what do we mean by art today? Why is defining the concept so difficult?

This article is an exploration of the meaning of art and an attempt to understand the relationship between art and artists, with some useful insights via interviews with both traditional and digital artists.

About Art – What Is It? Link
This question pops up often, and with many answers. Many argue that art cannot be defined. We could go about this in several ways. Art is often considered the process or product of deliberately arranging elements in a way that appeals to the senses or emotions. It encompasses a diverse range of human activities, creations and ways of expression, including music, literature, film, sculpture and paintings. The meaning of art is explored in a branch of philosophy known as aesthetics. At least, that’s what Wikipedia claims.

Art is generally understood as any activity or product done by people with a communicative or aesthetic purpose—something that expresses an idea, an emotion or, more generally, a world view.

It is a component of culture, reflecting economic and social substrates in its design. It transmits ideas and values inherent in every culture across space and time. Its role changes through time, acquiring more of an aesthetic component here and a socio-educational function there.

Painting by Scott Marr

Everything we’ve said so far has elements of truth but is mainly opinion. According to Wikipedia, “Art historians and philosophers of art have long had classificatory disputes about art regarding whether a particular cultural form or piece of work should be classified as art.”

The definition of art is open, subjective, debatable. There is no agreement among historians and artists, which is why we’re left with so many definitions of art. The concept itself has changed over centuries.
The very notion of art continues today to stir controversy, being so open to multiple interpretations. It can be taken simply to mean any human activity, or any set of rules needed to develop an activity. This would generalize the concept beyond what is normally understood as the fine arts, now broadened to encompass academic areas. The word has many other colloquial uses, too.

In this article, we mean art as a form of human expression of a creative nature.

The Evolution Of The Concept Of Art Link
While the definition of art has changed over the years, the field of art history has developed to allow us to categorize changes in art over time and to better understand how art shapes and is shaped by the creative impulses of artists.
Having a solid grasp of art history, then, is important. I spoke with Alexander Daniloff and Jonathan Ball about the concept of art through history and about whether tracing a line through traditional and contemporary art is possible.

Alexander Daniloff is a Russian artist who lives and works in Italy. His focus is painting, although he has worked in several media. Lately, he has worked on children’s illustrations. He has participated in various events and illustration competitions and has illustrated three books. He has held numerous individual and group exhibitions in Italy, Russia, Holland, Spain, Finland and the US.

Jonathan Ball is the creative behind Poked Studio, an innovative company committed to developing creative visual solutions. That’s not all: among its services, Poked Studio offers illustration; Web, graphic and blog design; 3-D rendering and visualization; motion graphics; children’s book illustration; Flash websites; and games.
Question: Can we trace a line from traditional to contemporary art?

Alexander Daniloff: I don’t think we can say anything without falling into controversy, even me. I have a traditional view and prefer artwork that speaks for the artist or period. I can’t explain what contemporary art is, or at least what it’s meant to be. Yes, you can trace a line from traditional to contemporary art, but not a straight one. Perhaps it is a parabola that goes up and then down, or a spiral. We don’t know. All we can say is that the art market has developed, which affects the art itself. With what we call contemporary art, words and explanations are always worth more.

Visual arts have been transformed by articles and critical essays; meanwhile, the works themselves have become mute. In the theater, the curators and critics have taken up the front row. This is my view on the difference between contemporary and traditional art.

I personally prefer art measured in human dimensions: art that whispers and doesn’t shout, art that covers me and makes me fly and does not crush. But I must confess, some of these modern things attract me; for example, mural painting (graffiti) and abstract things.

Aesthetics In Digital Art Link

Moving into the mid-20th century, the conceptual transformations that arose from new approaches to art led to a crisis of aesthetics, as was manifested in new art media.

Alberto Cerriteño

While borrowing many of the conventions of traditional media, digital art can draw upon aesthetics from many other fields. But various criticisms have been made against it: for example, given the variety of tools at their disposal, how much effort do digital artists really have to put into their work?
I asked Jan Willem Wennekes, also known as Zeptonn, for his opinion on this. He is a freelancer who specializes in illustrative design and art direction, with a focus on eco-friendly and environmental projects.
Jan Willem Wennekes: The question seems a bit ambiguous. On the one hand, there seems to be a question about the effort required to create digital art. That is, some people may think that using digital media to create art is easier than using traditional media. On the other hand, there seems to be a question of whether digital art is an art form in itself (or maybe at all?).
With respect to the first question, I think that working with digital media (mostly the computer, mouse, Wacom, scanner, software, etc.) does not have to differ from creating art in other media. The computer and all the tools generated by the software are still what they are: tools! You have to master those tools just as you have to master any other tools. For example, if you do not understand how light works, you won’t be able to create artwork with correct lighting, and so on. If you don’t know how the pen tool works in Illustrator, then you won’t be able to create good artwork, just like a traditional artist who doesn’t know how to use a pencil. You still have to master color theory and all the other things that are essential to creating a good or stunning piece of art. In that sense, it doesn’t matter whether it is a painting or a print. Simply put, you have to master all the tools and theory, just as you had to master them before. And the better you master them, the better your artwork can be.

Article concludes tomorrow..

Thanks for reading!

Please leave a comment if you gained anything valuable from this article.
Also, if you found this article interesting we have many other blogs @hybridna, check them out!