Elvis Lunchbox Art Analysis
Is my Elvis lunchbox art?
I must admit that this assignment was somewhat challenging for me. In reading the Sporre’s “Reality Through The Arts” (pg25), I’ve come to realize that I tend to lean more towards an Aesthetic approach in evaluating and analyzing art. While I may find intrinsic emotional value or inspiration in pieces of art, I mainly see, consider and enjoy it for what it is.
The artwork that I chose is a sculpture in my home that when looking at it gives me a different way of viewing friendships. While it has had had many different depictions and reincarnations, from the 20th century artist Giuseppe Armani Capodimonte figurine of Boys playing cards to the 1903 Cassius Marcellus Coolidge painting of Dogs Playing Poker I find certain
visual enjoyment in this rendition. The artist paid great attention to specific details of their hair texture, their hand gestures, the dresses they are wearing and even to the deck of cards on the table yet elected to leave the faces without any defining characteristics. This piece functions also as a social commentary, because socially and recreationally, this could be any group of women, of any economic background, anywhere in the world enjoying life and each other over a simple game of cards.
The craftsmanship, thought not of a museum worthy piece, is well done and as stated above, has definite attention to details and specific fine points that draw the eye. In consideration of Goethe’s questions regarding whether the artist communicated an idea to a viewer I would say that they were successful in expressing the representation of a simple life making the piece of work worth the effort.
As I analyzed and reflected on the criteria explained in the Sporre text, I am now seeing that even though an object might not hold great artistic value in the sense of what is considered professional artistry, a depth of appreciation for everyday objects that usually are not considered art.
I must admit that this assignment was somewhat challenging for me. In reading the Sporre’s “Reality Through The Arts” (pg25), I’ve come to realize that I tend to lean more towards an Aesthetic approach in evaluating and analyzing art. While I may find intrinsic emotional value or inspiration in pieces of art, I mainly see, consider and enjoy it for what it is.
The artwork that I chose is a sculpture in my home that when looking at it gives me a different way of viewing friendships. While it has had had many different depictions and reincarnations, from the 20th century artist Giuseppe Armani Capodimonte figurine of Boys playing cards to the 1903 Cassius Marcellus Coolidge painting of Dogs Playing Poker I find certain
visual enjoyment in this rendition. The artist paid great attention to specific details of their hair texture, their hand gestures, the dresses they are wearing and even to the deck of cards on the table yet elected to leave the faces without any defining characteristics. This piece functions also as a social commentary, because socially and recreationally, this could be any group of women, of any economic background, anywhere in the world enjoying life and each other over a simple game of cards.
The craftsmanship, thought not of a museum worthy piece, is well done and as stated above, has definite attention to details and specific fine points that draw the eye. In consideration of Goethe’s questions regarding whether the artist communicated an idea to a viewer I would say that they were successful in expressing the representation of a simple life making the piece of work worth the effort.
As I analyzed and reflected on the criteria explained in the Sporre text, I am now seeing that even though an object might not hold great artistic value in the sense of what is considered professional artistry, a depth of appreciation for everyday objects that usually are not considered art.