Tolstoy's Philosophy of Art.

After defining the difference between real and counterfeit art, Tolstoy goes on to relay the difference between what classifies good and bad art. Tolstoy claims that good art is found in two categories. The first one is “religious art – transmitting both positive feelings of love of God and one’s neighbor…” and the second one is “good universal art” which is so “free from superfluous detail that the story may be told to any circle and will be equally comprehensible and touching to everyone” (519). In comparison, he classifies bad art as art that is “comprehensible only to those of a certain circle” (520). Because often times art is only comprehensible by a certain class or group of people, it does not evoke a universal feeling and inherent knowledge of why the artist created a certain piece and what he/she was feeling at that time.

Based on Tolstoy’s philosophy regarding real art versus counterfeit art and good art versus bad art, it seems to me that he would more than likely classify most pieces of the example art is counterfeit and/or bad art. Bull’s Head by Picasso is a representation based on resemblance, therefore an imitation and could be considered counterfeit. The “Idol from Amorgos” would be considered by Tolstoy to be a form of idolatry, therefore not good Christian art. The Black Quadrilateral by Kazimir Malevich would more than likely be defined by Tolstoy as counterfeit because it doesn’t seem to express or transmit an expression of a feeling that the artist intended to convey. The statue of David by Donatello would more than likely be defined as counterfeit by Tolstoy because of what may be some type of political meaning. Anything ecclesiastical or patriotic is not good art in Tolstoy’s opinion as well. It seems to me that Tolstoy would probably classify a good majority of what the world considers to be good art today as counterfeit and would certainly label most of it as bad.