I subscribe to the Metropolitan Museum of Art on Facebook. On Aug 4, they published this question:
Share your connection: Do you find that an artist’s intentions for creating a work of art can be more compelling than the work itself?
with this weblink in the post: http://www.metmuseum.org/connections/intention/#/
Intention – Online marketing coordinator Alex Hills considers purpose behind the object to be the most important element to art.
They received varying answers, as to be expected.
My answer on the post was that I felt skill and execution was just as important as the concept. I believe that if you have a concept, but you can not express it, you need to keep going until you can… it would never be finished, it would be like a half thought up dream of inconsequential and mindless babble until the communication became clear. Kinda like a child learning to speak.
Of course… good art transcends the verbiage that we throw at it or try to use to explain. Good art, in my opinion, is when you can just stand and drink it all in. It is more than just the skill, it is more than just the expression – it is all of that and more.
What I found interesting is that all of the examples on this slideshow were by artists who were adept and skillful
on their own, and the concepts behind were important yes, but the works were extremely well done in and of themselves. The execution was solid. The concept appeared to add another layer, but it was not the be-all and end-all of the work.
Work that relies on just concept alone for its success, is like eating beans, with all the hot air that comes as a result. For me, I need more than that. I have seen almost every art display at the local alternative art gallery, and can I remember much about them? Not really. I think that is what is wrong with today’s art. It is seen and quickly forgotten – if it is just a concept holding the work together, then there is no skill to be remembered and admired.
Just another ramble.