Blog prompt 11 – What is Art?

Tolstoy uses the test of infectiousness, not only as a descriptive measure for what should count as art, but also as a standard for good art (#28-32). What does he mean by this standard? How does he suggest we apply this test to evaluate art? Is this a useful proposal for evaluating the quality of art? If you disagree with this proposal, how would you challenge it?

Tolstoy defines art as a form of communication, this means that there is an equal understanding of emotions flowing between an artist and any observer that comes across said art. Tolstoy has a belief that true art is any work that is able to invoke a strong emotion and unite people solely based on shared emotions, this means that the art itself should be made with the idea in mind that it allows for an outsider to be able to easily understand and feel another persons emotions without any extra actions needing to be done. After Tolstoy explains his definition of art and how people with different backgrounds feel towards it he begins to bring up the term “infectiousness” quite often (this starts at about line 25). His use of this word allows for him describe the effect (internal and external) art has on an individual after encountering it, and the level of infectiousness also, in someway, determines how great the artwork is and if the art is even “real” or not. This is seen in line 29 where he states that “The stronger the infection, the better is the art as art,” (Tolstoy, line 29). Now, to make life easier for us Tolstoy goes on to break down what three conditions an art piece must contain to be considered infectious, “#30. And the degree of the infectiousness of art depends on three conditions:

1. On the greater or lesser individuality of the feeling transmitted;
2. on the greater or lesser clearness with which the feeling is transmitted;
3. on the sincerity of the artist, i.e., on the greater or lesser force with which the artist himself feels the emotion he transmits.” (Tolstoy, line 30).

Through this guideline one is able to interpret that if a piece of art contains all three of these conditions it is art, and if each condition feels sincere and is clearly represented the better the art is at being art. But, if a so called art piece does not contain one of the three conditions it is labeled as a counterfeit and is presumed to be “…not a work of art,” (Tolstoy, line 37).

Art in the eyes of Tolstoy must have an effect on someone. His suggestion is that if an individual can clearly feel the intensity of an emotion being portrayed in a unique way by an artist it is something that would be considered art regardless if the emotions coming from the art are positive or negative. But if one does not feel any emotion or movement from a piece and remains indifferent it now has no meaning and is considered not art. Tolstoy’s proposal for evaluating the art is good, sadly it lacks understanding that everyone interprets objects in their life differently due to personal experience. I also believe that art can be good and have absolutely no meaning behind it, an example of this is the unimaginable amount of paintings of fruit, their only purpose is to show off the artist’s understanding of shading and light to make things look realistic.

Lastly, if I were to change Tolstoy’s proposal I would make it into one that acknowledges people’s backgrounds and am understanding of how their pasts effect how their perceive and interpret art in the world around them.

word count: 610

source: http://www.csulb.edu/~jvancamp/361r14.html