What Is Art For?
Objectives:
- Consider the origins of art
- Explore a brief history of Western Art
- Examine multiple perspectives for evaluating art
Artifact (original post link):
The terminology “Paleoanthropsychobiological” is coined by Ellen Dissanayake, who is the author of this week’s reading. This adjective is a combination of paleontology, anthropology, psychology, and biology. Basically, this means everything. In the reading, Ellen states “First, that the idea of art encompasses all of human history; second, that it include all human societies; and third, that it accounts for the fact that art is a psychological or emotional need and has psychological or emotional effects.” (Page 15) Ellen uses “paleoanthropsychobiological” to define what art is.
Dissanayake mentions “making special” many times in the reading. She describes “making special” with a case of comparison between animals and humans. Ellen says “Now all animals can tell the difference between the ordinary or routine and the extraordinary or unusual. They would not survive if they were oblivious to the snapping twig or sudden shadow that means a predator may be nearby. But when joined with the other abilities that evolving humans had – intelligence, resourcefulness, emotional and mental complexity, the ability to plan ahead – the “special” could take on a significance that was more than simply alertness to possible danger.” (Page 22) Humans have special abilities to survive such as intelligence, resourcefulness and many more that other animals do not have. With these special abilities, humans can create art. Humans have all the abilities that art must contain, which fit to the adjective “paleoanthropsychobiological”. Therefore, everything humans do becomes art.
There are three main different theories that Dissanyake describes. They are modernism, post-modernism, and species-centered view. Modernism was prominent from 18th century to 19th century. In the reading, “Included in the many new approaches and subjects that 18th century thinkers turned their attention to was a subject that came to be called “aesthetics” – a concern with elucidating principles such as taste and beauty that govern all the arts and indeed make them not simply paintings or statues but examples of (fine) “art”” (Page 17) From this statement, human sees art as ideology. Dissanyake also mentions, “This was that there is a special frame of mind for appreciating works of art – a “disinterested” attitude that is separate from one’s own personal interest in the object, its utility, or its social or religious ramifications.” (Page 17) Basically, it explains the movement from the art of medieval times to modernism. Post-modernism sees art as an object to interpret. In the reading, the author states, “a point of view that calls into question two centuries of assumptions about the elite and special nature of art….postmodernists are united in repudiating the “high” art view…” (Page 19) Postmodernism challenges the entire “modernist” ideology. The time period of postmodernism is late 20th century movement. Lastly, Dissanyake introduces the species-view of art theory. This is related to the adjective “paleoanthropsychobiological”. Dissanyake mentions, “…I believe, by considering art in the broadest possible perspective- the palaeoanthropsychobiological view that I mentioned – as a universal need and propensity of the human species.” (Page 21) She combines the two characteristics of modernism and postmodernism. She also mentions “the species-centered view of art combines modernism’s proclamation that art is of supreme value and a source for heightened personal experience with postmodernism’s insistence that it belongs to everyone and is potentially all around us. It does this by thinking of artmaking and experiencing as a human behavior.” (Page 22)
The terminology “Paleoanthropsychobiological” is coined by Ellen Dissanayake, who is the author of this week’s reading. This adjective is a combination of paleontology, anthropology, psychology, and biology. Basically, this means everything. In the reading, Ellen states “First, that the idea of art encompasses all of human history; second, that it include all human societies; and third, that it accounts for the fact that art is a psychological or emotional need and has psychological or emotional effects.” (Page 15) Ellen uses “paleoanthropsychobiological” to define what art is.
Dissanayake mentions “making special” many times in the reading. She describes “making special” with a case of comparison between animals and humans. Ellen says “Now all animals can tell the difference between the ordinary or routine and the extraordinary or unusual. They would not survive if they were oblivious to the snapping twig or sudden shadow that means a predator may be nearby. But when joined with the other abilities that evolving humans had – intelligence, resourcefulness, emotional and mental complexity, the ability to plan ahead – the “special” could take on a significance that was more than simply alertness to possible danger.” (Page 22) Humans have special abilities to survive such as intelligence, resourcefulness and many more that other animals do not have. With these special abilities, humans can create art. Humans have all the abilities that art must contain, which fit to the adjective “paleoanthropsychobiological”. Therefore, everything humans do becomes art.
There are three main different theories that Dissanyake describes. They are modernism, post-modernism, and species-centered view. Modernism was prominent from 18th century to 19th century. In the reading, “Included in the many new approaches and subjects that 18th century thinkers turned their attention to was a subject that came to be called “aesthetics” – a concern with elucidating principles such as taste and beauty that govern all the arts and indeed make them not simply paintings or statues but examples of (fine) “art”” (Page 17) From this statement, human sees art as ideology. Dissanyake also mentions, “This was that there is a special frame of mind for appreciating works of art – a “disinterested” attitude that is separate from one’s own personal interest in the object, its utility, or its social or religious ramifications.” (Page 17) Basically, it explains the movement from the art of medieval times to modernism. Post-modernism sees art as an object to interpret. In the reading, the author states, “a point of view that calls into question two centuries of assumptions about the elite and special nature of art….postmodernists are united in repudiating the “high” art view…” (Page 19) Postmodernism challenges the entire “modernist” ideology. The time period of postmodernism is late 20th century movement. Lastly, Dissanyake introduces the species-view of art theory. This is related to the adjective “paleoanthropsychobiological”. Dissanyake mentions, “…I believe, by considering art in the broadest possible perspective- the palaeoanthropsychobiological view that I mentioned – as a universal need and propensity of the human species.” (Page 21) She combines the two characteristics of modernism and postmodernism. She also mentions “the species-centered view of art combines modernism’s proclamation that art is of supreme value and a source for heightened personal experience with postmodernism’s insistence that it belongs to everyone and is potentially all around us. It does this by thinking of artmaking and experiencing as a human behavior.” (Page 22)
Reflection:
From time to time, the definition or criteria of art has been evolved. By doing this What Is Art For? Essay, I got a chance to look at the origin of art, a brief history of art, and the many different perspectives of evaluating arts. There are three main perspectives of evaluating arts: modernism, postmodernism, and the palaeoanthropsychobiological view of art that Dissanyake suggests. From these three different perspectives, I changed my point of view for art a lot. Before reading the reading, I thought that art is far away from me; art is only for someone special. After reading it, I started seeing things as “special”.
The paleoanthropsychobiological view is the species-view of art theory. The Dissanyake demonstrates the species-view of the art theory as “he species-centered view of art combines modernism’s proclamation that art is of supreme value and a source for heightened personal experience with postmodernism’s insistence that it belongs to everyone and is potentially all around us.” (Page 22) With this theory, Dissanyake wants us to broaden our perspectives. All of human behaviors are somewhat related to or potentially can be viewed as art. Art is everywhere around us. I have learned that nothing can be an art as well if people make or think it as “special”
Future goals:
I would like to broaden my perspectives as possible so that I can give a special meaning to whatever I do. Something that is not important to someone can be an art to someone else. I would like to give special meanings to everything I do; in that way, my life can be more valuable and makes me enjoy my life more every moment just like the author’s statement “Adopting the species-centered view of art allows us personally to better appreciate the continuity of ourselves and our artmaking with nature.” (Page 26)
Previous Page: The Nature of Human Values
Next Page:Is Food Art?