Sometimes I search and view great art and photographs for free on internet. What is the difference between a painting of something Vs photograph of painting of something? Just like Mr. Bean replaced a painting (of Whistler’s mother) with its “poster” and no one could make out.
We can say that original art shows more to the eye than their replica. I think most of us don’t have that kind of an ‘eye’ for details. I mean art is more like fad. We don’t really understand it but pretend to understand; there is nothing to understand also. Just like I don’t try to “study” each roti my wife makes, even though there could be art in a roti smile emoticon – e.g. in a painting if one’s nose is a bit twisted, is it a ‘defect’? Most of us will first like to know who is the painter; if painter is a “famous” one, twisted note is declared fine; if painter is a newcomer, it is declared a defect. Abstract painting is still fine, because we can make different meanings out of it to cheat/amuse ourselves. But in this painting for example of a man staring sideways, there is no message, no purpose, it is just a portrait of a man I don’t know why its “photograph” wont serve the purpose of its painting?
A friend said that when he went to Shanti Niketan, he felt God’s presence there. I think that may be more because he knew it was “Shanti Niketan. I am not sure if he were taken “blindfolded” there, he would still feel something supernatural. We can do an exercise – show same painting to two persons. One is told that it was sketched by some great artist; to second it is told that it is sketched by an amateur. The first person will find it “perfect”; the second will find many defects in it.
I have visited Mumbai’s national gallery of modern art and of course almost every museum and palace in India has a gallery where paintings are stored in plenty, almost everyone has experience to go through the experience. Most of the time we appreciate the art, i.e. artists’ skills, which is also possible to do so even by seeing the pictures of original paintings.
At most of the galleries where I have gone, now I don’t remember even 5% of their paintings; except a few things here and there. But I remember the buildings very well and the experience of moving from one room to the other. So the experience is not exactly in the “original” paintings and the paintings are a small part of the experience. As I said, we would get same exact feelings even if each of the art was a duplicate, if we were not told about it…
Also, I hate art because it is a big bad world – most dealers in art are looking for black money; most great art piece are either stolen or smuggled and hence underworld controls supplies; and I don’t like an idea of young talented men moving around in beards with a piece of folded paper stuck in their armpits. I mean it is a great way of self-entertainment and noble past time; but the professional art market is a big bad world.
I always maintain that I don’t know much about art. But the only thing I add to my position is that most others also don’t understand it. I believe we can’t be expert in everything, so I don’t even try to be so in art – most “unrelated” and “unreal” profession ever. I mean designers of video games contribute more to the civilization than artists post invention of a photography camera.
Disclaimer: Views expressed are personal.
