My Kid Could Paint That - Paint and Canvass Is Not Art - Research Paper Example

Paint and Canvass is Not Art Introduction My Kid Could Paint That is a documentary film showed in 2007 which was written, produced, and directed by Amir Bar-Lev under the Passion Pictures and A&E Indie Films. The film is about Marla Olmstead, a 4-year-old girl from Binghamton, New York who was put into limelight due to her exceptional prowess in painting abstracts, which have sold for thousands of dollars per piece. The film has revolved on how the little girl has learned, enhanced and performed her abstract artworks. However, the film failed to show how Marla created her artworks from start to finish. This loophole was observed and criticized by the media which drew the little poor girl into controversy (Ebert, p.1). The media questioned whether she is the real artist behind the artwork or if she is just being used and exploited in order to sell up the “masterpieces.” Moreover, this argument is found to be important in this analysis because it has a relation with the focal question whether or not Marla Olmstead can be considered as “an artist.” There definitely are young people that are called child prodigies. But considering that art is construed as the mode of expression and the manifestation of emotion or pleasure, a four-year-old child is questionably capable of expressing herself or explain the reasons behind her artworks to be categorized as an artist. Thus, this paper would seek to determine the various criteria and theories of arts in order to consider someone to be an artist. For the purpose of providing reliable answer for this issue, the researcher would support the argument based on various theories of arts such as mimetic, expressive, aesthetic and institutional art as well as the three basic criteria in order to consider something as an art. Discussion Art, whether generally accepted or not is a representation of the artist’s knowledge and skills. Therefore, the artist should at least feel an obligation to be knowledgeable about his work. Since this paper seeks to determine whether or not a child could be considered as an artist, it will determine first the criteria in order to consider a certain work as an art with the underlying notion of representation. The criteria include the artist’s intention so that a work is considered art if it is done by someone as a representation, for the purpose of attracting an aesthetic response from the audience. Hence, in creating art, the artist does not only want to provoke or please audience but also want to communicate something and the artwork would not only be perceived by the senses (Hermanson, pp. 2-3). The criteria also include the quality of the work, which means that it should be closely associated with the idea of skill wherein there is technical competence as well as traditionally associated with the idea of beauty. It is about form or the way the elements of the work is put together, or content which usually answers what it depicts or describe (p 5). A work is considered as an art if there is response from the audience (p 6). These criteria are also included in various theories of arts. The art theories include the mimetic, expressive, aesthetic and institutional art. Mimetic art theory is considered as the most basic theoretical principle because it is simply the imitation, mimicry or representation of nature. Coined from the Greek word “mime” which means “imitation” or to copy reality (Mr Hermanson, p 14; Spiegel, P1), this theory of art was established by Plato and Aristotle suggesting that all artistic creation is a form of imitation and the artist is the “imitator.” In the case of painting, subject should exist in reality and should be a type created by God in order to perceive the representation of the ideal type. Hence, a painting is supposed to look just like the real thing or recognizable, whatever it is portraying or resemblance of the model (Berleant, p.167). Aristotle further detailed that art is the imitation of an action of life. Hence, he theorized that art is the accurate representation of the object or events humans have experienced (Berleant, p. 166). And he also emphasized that a good art is natural and beneficial since it is natural for human beings to imitate (Spiegel, P1). Expressive theory viewed art as the representation or manifestation of the inner state of the artist or the mode of artist’s expression. It speaks about the expression of emotion. It is a way of showing the unique, individual feelings and emotions of the artist. Thus, the strength of this art theory lays on how the artist successfully communicates the feelings and emotions she intended to express. This is the common reason why the artist is often asked by her audience to explain what she is trying to express in her work in order to prove if they are similarly affected by the same feelings or emotions (Berleant, p 170). Aesthetic art theory states that art exists for the sake of its beauty alone. This theory emphasized that a work is called an art if it appeals and satisfies the imagination and intellect of the audience. Anyone who receives appreciation of her art work could be called an artist. This philosophical foundation of art was established by Immanuel Kant who based his theory on the reaction to prevailing utilitarian social philosophies and to what was perceived as the ugliness and philistinism of the industrial age (Spiegel, P6). He further explained that aesthetic standards were important in order to perceive morality, utility, or pleasure. This theory was supported and advanced by several philosophers such as J.W. von Goethe, J.L. Tieck, Samuel Taylor Coleridge, Thomas Carlyle, Madame de Stael, Theophile Gautier, and Victor Cousin. These philosophers believed that “art is for art’s sake” (Spiegel, P6). Another theory used in this analysis is the institutional theory of art developed by George Dickie. Based on this theory, there are two things about a work to be considered as art: it should be an artifact and people from the “art world” - referred to as a broad social institution or a network of systems consisting of theatre, painting, sculpture, literature, and so on - has conferred the status of a candidate for appreciation. Dickie referred that an artifact is anything that have all been worked on to some extent by human beings. According to his theory, any object for as long as it is displayed in an art gallery, even if it is just a piece of driftwood picked up on the seashore could be considered as an artifact. He further explained that if it is placed in a gallery, people would look at it and in a certain way would count it as art. Dickie’s view on art was simple because he believed that works of art are simply those things which certain people call works of art (Sclafani, p 111). Analysis The overall concept of art is broad and difficult to ascertain because it means different to different peoples. Therefore, in order to argue whether or not Marla Olmstead could be considered as an artist would need the various theories of arts presented in this paper as basis as well as the necessary ideological understanding about art and the artist. Based on mimetic theory of art by Aristotle and Plato that an art is the “imitation of nature”, the conflict is presented due to the nature of Marla’s abstract painting or non-representational art. Its use of color mixes may imitate reality but figurative in nature and lacking the basic criteria of mimetic theory. In consideration of the expressive theory of art, Marla could not be considered as an artist because as a four-year-old, she lacked the ideas that are represented in the canvass she supposedly created. She still cannot explain the idea or concept of her artworks. Her works are not the result of her representation or manifestation of her inner state or mode of expression but the result of her playfulness without any intention to convey or express her feelings. However, the aesthetic theory of art opposed the first two theories proposing art exists for the sake of its beauty alone. Anyone who perceived and received appreciation of her works could be considered as artist. Thus, based on this theory, Marla, regardless of her age and the type of artwork, could be considered as an artist because her abstract paintings have been recognized and appreciated by many audience and even buyers. In the case of Marla, the proofs that her artworks are appreciated were the fact that they were exhibited in a gallery, given media interest, and even have high value. Although the institutional theory differs in basis and assumption of what is art with aesthetic art theory, it affirmed Marla as an artist. The institutional theory of Dickie states that the object should be an artifact which meant that the object has been exhibited or placed in an art gallery. Marla definitely met this criterion. Although the last two theories proposed that Marla Olmstead could be considered an artist, the researcher stands that Marla could not be considered as artist. The reasons were twofold: first, the film was exaggerated and it has loopholes such as the negligence to document the whole process which shows Marla performing her artwork from start to finish. The movie only documented Marla performing parts of “her” artworks. Second, Marla has been proposed to be used and exploited by her artist father in order to sell up the pieces (Ebert, P4). In order to convey the audience to believe about the exceptional prowess of the four-year-old child, the film should have documented her work process properly and credibly. Conclusion As mentioned earlier, art is very broad and difficult to ascertain to every work or piece done by individuals or groups. There are various and many criteria to meet the requirements of work of art. However, it is possible that every person or group may have their own view about art. Art means different things to different people. Marla’s story as an artist based on the film was questionable. Having a father as an unknown or struggling artist is an additional problem that the film should have properly addressed to insist that Marla as “the” artist. While abstract art may encompass certain vagueness or difficulty in deciphering their conveyed messages or meaning, they have aesthetic qualities that can only be met through skillful execution of a line, a curve, a dot, or a shape. Although Marla met two criteria to be considered as an artist, it is her person as the worker of the object that is in question. In this world of commercialism and materialism, fraud, tricks, and deception abound where the opportunity to gain money presents itself. This has happened several times when it comes to art. Many art works including popular ones are imitated to the dot and sold as the authentic thing, and many works are considered much better than the ogrish works of Pablo Picasso, but these are not selling much, nor even see the light of a gallery. To be able to deceive audience of art, people and buyers does not make an artist, and this applies to Marla Olmstead. Works Cited: Anonymous. “THE ARTS: DEFINITIONS, AESTHETICS, KNOWLEDGE AND RELATION TO SCIENCE” PPT available at www.mrhermanson.com/theory-of-knowledge/the-arts/art.ppt. [Accessed on Web: November 8, 2011]. Beleant, Arnold. “Surrogate Theories of Art” Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 30 (2). Dec. 1969. Pp. 163-185. Laurie, Spiegel. “Theories of Art” Document available on http://retiary.org/art_theories/theories_of_art.html. [Accessed on Web: November 8, 2011]. Ebert, Roger. “My Child Could paint That: A Review.” Article available at http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071018/REVIEWS/710180306. Posted on Oct. 19, 2007. [Accessed on Web: November 8, 2011]. Sclafani, Richard, J. “Art as a Social Institution: Dickie's New Definition” The Journal of Aesthetics and Art Criticism. Vol. 32, No. 1 (Autumn, 1973), pp. 111. Blackwell Publishing. Read More