Devereaux claims that formalism doesn’t work in appreciating film like Triumph of Will since “distancing ourselves from the morally objectionable elements of the film… means distancing ourselves from the features that make it the work of art it is” (pg. 354). In another word, the political aspect of this film is an artistic element that can’t be ignored when we appreciate it, and it is partly responsible for making the film an art piece. Do you agree with her view? Has formalism or sophisticated formalism been outdated? Should we abandon formalism totally when we appreciate a movie made in 1935 just because it has less to do with art today?
Freeland Ch. 7
To conclude But Is It Art?, Freeland introduces three philosophers and their diverse thoughts on new technology’s influences on art interpretation. Philosopher Marshall McLuhan is optimistic, declaring new media to “promote connectedness and a new international community (‘the global village’)”, since it can be experienced by more people universally (203). Based off of McLuhan’s claims, can you think of a time in which art was expressed digitally and how/ if it effected the viewer’s interpretation of that artwork? In what ways can working with the new media be beneficial in comparison to traditional artwork? What methods do you use to interpret an artwork? Would technology effect your method of interpretation? How do you think the use of new technology has impacted art and its interpretation?
The answer should be (5-8 sentences)
Readings are attached