kara walling blog 2

Topic of my choice:Modern Art vs. Religious Art
12/1/09

This is one of the first things we discussed in class. Modern Art and Religious Art are used in two different ways. Modern Art, for example a museum, is never allowed to be tampered with or touched. Usually it is framed with a glass casing or has a rope surrounding it, preventing those observing the art from touching it or altering it in any way. Religious Art however traces back to when tribes would create paintings. The interesting aspect here is art is never preserved. Each great work that is created is pained over by another work. This to me serves more meaning than Modern Art because the intention seems to be more about expression, than restoring the art. In a sense, no piece of art is more important than the other, because one great work is done after another, each serving a special purpose. When we asked the question, "what is art" someone in class said it can depend on who has the power to define art. I believe this is true. Also art is a form of self-expression, not directly self-expression. If these two statement are true, does that mean Modern Art is tamed in a sense? I just feel like Religious Art has more meaning behind it because there are no rules or guidelines in a sense. When we were younger we were allowed to finger paint and it was looked upon as a piece of art, a form of self-expression. Over the years it seems as though it is self-expression, but only to a certain extend. I don't know, it was just something I thought about.