Snapshot or Artwork?

Categories Reading

When somebody creates something and starts calling it a work of art, an eyebrow (or two) may raise on someone else’s face when hearing the comment… or after seeing the piece in question (let’s think about a visual representation as an example since there’s only pictures on this website). Is it skepticism or what?

So, what makes something a work of art? Is there a consensus on meeting specific requirements? Does it need to have certain characteristics/traits/qualities? Is a favorable opinion enough to justify receiving such a distinction? Or is it two? Three? From who? From someone knowledgeable? An expert on what exactly? Does it depend on where it is contextually placed?

This topic is hard to agree upon, that’s for sure.

Reviewing online sources to determine what a work of art is, they seem to agree it is something intentionally created to communicate or express a message or an idea, to provoke an emotional response from an audience, or to make them exercise their minds: to think. Some of it involves the creator; the rest is more akin to spectators.

It must be emphasized, however, that art is highly subjective, and its interpretation depends on individual, social, cultural and even historical perspectives: time and place basically, and everything in between. The attributes in italics impart an aesthetic value to any piece in question triggering a reaction that can run back and forth along a broad spectrum of viewpoints.

Skill/technique and originality, often quoted when referring to art, can also influence or condition opinions on creativity, and the latter is crucial to understanding this constantly evolving subject. 


Some references:

Leave a Reply