Shape is a very important aspect of Consider the Options. At first sight the most prominent shapes are the star-burst explosions behind the man and around the base of the building support system. Although in real life explosions do not really have “mass” they appear very large and take up a lot of space within the paining.
Contrasting colors are present in the painting. Art Green uses a mainly Newtonian primary color system. The building is painted using varying shades of blue, the explosions are in yellow outlined by red, and the two framing buildings, cloud lines, and the “NO!” are done in red. This color system prevents the colors from becoming muddy to the eye, and shows importance by separating shapes from their surroundings. The only exceptions to the color scheme are the green used for the grass, and the grey used in the cloud filling, and frame. The green is a minor characteristic of the painting since it is in the background, however the grey is very important. Since the artwork is not presented in the gallery with any sort of physical frame, the artist used a thick grey line around the whole painting. The only compromise to this implied or visual frame is the movement in of the NO! bubble.
The illusion of light within the painting has some interesting characteristics. One would expect that the explosions are creating most of the light present in the art. But the use of shading and shadows does not always reflect this. The man’s shadow is behind him pointing directly at one of the explosions.
Contrasting colors are present in the painting. Art Green uses a mainly Newtonian primary color system. The building is painted using varying shades of blue, the explosions are in yellow outlined by red, and the two framing buildings, cloud lines, and the “NO!” are done in red. This color system prevents the colors from becoming muddy to the eye, and shows importance by separating shapes from their surroundings. The only exceptions to the color scheme are the green used for the grass, and the grey used in the cloud filling, and frame. The green is a minor characteristic of the painting since it is in the background, however the grey is very important. Since the artwork is not presented in the gallery with any sort of physical frame, the artist used a thick grey line around the whole painting. The only compromise to this implied or visual frame is the movement in of the NO! bubble.
The illusion of light within the painting has some interesting characteristics. One would expect that the explosions are creating most of the light present in the art. But the use of shading and shadows does not always reflect this. The man’s shadow is behind him pointing directly at one of the explosions.
Denis Dutton begins by analyzing the phrase “they have a concept of art different than ours.” He says that the words “concept of” are the defining part of the original phrase. What Dutton is trying to demonstrate is that while the functionality of art may be different in a culture other than ours, it can still be appreciated using the same emotions we devote to our art in the Western world. He then begins to viciously tear apart critic after critic, denouncing their arguments as those of lesser minds.
Hart, the first scholar to be considered, centers her essay around Indian wall paintings in marriage homes. Over many paragraphs she contrasts the function of the artist in Hindu and Western societies. By refusing to call the Jyonthi painters “artists,” and instead calling them “producers,” she seemed to have greatly angered Dutton. Hart goes on to add a description of western artists as driven only by the desire to be in an art gallery. Dutton responds with “I... challenge the adequacy, indeed the competence, of this as a description of Western art.” After reading this segment of the chapter, I was somewhat taken aback much like Dutton was at the description of western art. Although it is true that the artist is not producing the art with the same intention to sell it, or gain fame through its production, the art is still produced with equal levels and intensity and inspiration. The inadequacy of arguments continues to be the overall theme of the essay. Many of the viewpoints Dutton critiques do not fulfill his need for closure.
The second article considers the separation the audience feels from the artist. Alfred Gell describes the “magic” of creating art that average people do not understand. In a social sense, this “magic”, creates a new social strata for the artist. For people to truly appreciate the art, they have to have little understanding of how it was created. This may be true for art where we just don’t know what techniques the artist used, but Dutton brings up the point of modern art. The one example he uses to debunk this viewpoint is the placement of a statue, specifically a Fountain by Duchamp. We know that it is placed as art because it represents something different than just a fountain. Yet we still know exactly how it was produced; just like all the other fountains like it. The use of known signs as art, especially if the sign represents an attack on technique itself, take the wind out of Gell’s argument. From viewing art previously, I do understand Gell’s viewpoint. Art does have a “magical” sense when I don’t know how it was made or the intricate styles that the artist uses.
