The reading: A Rough History of Modern Aesthetics by Seel led me to look back at my blog about my first trip to the High Museum. When I went through the European Art exhibit, I made the comment that many of the pieces were for purely aesthetic and not functional use. But going through the High Museum this past weekend, looking for a piece for the Rhetorical Analysis project, I realized something. I had in mind that I was looking for a piece to analyze, so I looked for a piece of art that made an argument. What I realized is that when I went through the first time, I was ignorant of the many arguments being made. The pieces I admired for their aesthetic beauty also made an argument about something. They might not have served a functional purpose (you wouldn’t sit in some of the chairs created by Ron Arad) but they certainly serve a purpose beyond looking pretty.
I had the same experience. I also went to the European design exhibit and really enjoyed it but didnt see the functional purpose of the strange chairs, soafs, benches, lights, and etc., but not everything need a functional purpose for it to still be useful!
ReplyDeleteVictoria Jones