In Dissanayake’s discussion “What is art for?”, the idea of art embodies many meanings. Prior to reading this, I believed that artists were given a gift where they could see things that weren’t actually there; they could paint a meadow that symbolized some deeper meaning where as my meadow would simply be a painting of a meadow. Dissanayake stated that artists don’t view the world in a special way, but rather “…interpret it according to their individual and cultural sensibilities” (p19). The identification of culture in art is key in the author’s point that art is a behavior. She explains that while most art is identified as objects, those works of art are a result of artistic behavior. In one of my classes, Anthropology of Papua New Guinea, we went into detail about the different tribes that lived on the land, and their different forms of ritual. One common thing was that they all used art in ceremonies, which I believe is a good example of art as a behavior. Dissanayake describes ceremonial art in different cultures that she has studied, and how often these ceremonies are like rights of passage. In Papua New Guinea, one of the main ceremonies is that of a boy maturing to a man, during which they all dress up and paint their bodies. This is an art form that we don’t see in the United States because it is a result of their culture and behavior, but just because we don’t see it here doesn’t mean we don’t identify it as art. The author makes a compelling point that “There is no appreciation of art without interpretation” (p19). I agree with the author on this point on two levels. The first level brings me back to my example of painting a meadow; some may view it as simply a meadow while others will be able to interpret deeper meaning to it. The other reason I agree with the author’s statement is because art doesn’t necessarily have to have one meaning. Regardless of what the artist meant to convey in their work, most of the time they won’t be there when people critique their work, which gives viewers the freedom of interpretation. With this freedom, art can be viewed in countless ways.
For the first point you mentioned, I think different people will have a distinct understanding about one single artwork. This is based on two things, one is the background of the person, and another one is the mental model of the individual. The background is related to one’s culture and family, as well as the people they live with. This may give people to think in one particular way when they interpret the art works if they come from similar backgrounds. Another factor is how our mental mode influences the way we view the art. This is about our value system, and how we think the value is. It is true that we will view artworks as valuable and that is the reason why so many people love to collect different art works.
I agree with you that art can be viewed in different ways because the reason I just mentioned. No one is entirely same with others, so we all have different ways to interpret the artworks. I think this also relates to two levels. The first level is how artists present the art works, and the second one is what the emotion that the artists want to deliver is. I think people may have similar feeling about the first level because that is how we view the surface of the artworks. However, people may have distinct ideas about the emotion they get from the art.
I believe people’s backgrounds strongly influence their interpretation of art, especially their culture like you stated. Your idea of mental modes affecting our interpretation was one I had not thought of, but I see your point. Depending on the way our brains function and the mental modes we use, we view value differently. An interesting example of that would be with gender, seeing as men and women often process information differently using different mental modes. Gender may have a strong influence on how one interprets art. I liked your point about how people view art similarly on a first level, or just seeing it for what it is. I thought this was interesting because it is an example of something people have in common; everyone can see the meadow, or whatever the surface of the art is. It is in the deeper understanding of the artwork were people’s individuality is evident.