Art is often seen as a form of expression, a way to communicate one’s thoughts and feelings. It can be used to express emotion, tell a story, or simply capture a moment in time. art can take many forms, including painting, sculpture, photography, and performance art. There is no single definition of art, but it is generally agreed that art should evoke an emotional response in the viewer.
It should also be aesthetically pleasing and have some sort of meaning or message that the artist is trying to convey. Art is a very subjective topic, and what one person may find beautiful or moving, another may find ugly or offensive. This is what makes art so interesting and exciting – there are no rules or boundaries, and anything can be art if it is created with the intention of being art. There are no right or wrong answers when it comes to art, only personal opinions.
We will not be able to recognize what quality is art if we do not understand first what it is. I am most satisfied with Tolstoy’s definition of art from his essay “What is Art?” (pckt pg.21). According to Tolstoy, art is a form of expression that allows the artist to express his feelings and emotions; it’s a “means of communication between man and man” (pckt pg. 23).
Tolstoy believed that the purpose of art was not to instruct or morally uplift the audience, but to create an emotional response. He further divided art into two different types: (1) useful art, which includes all works that have a practical purpose such as a painting of a landscape or a building, and (2) beautiful art, which is created solely for the sake of its beauty and does not serve any practical purpose. Tolstoy’s definition is appealing because it is inclusive; it allows for both literature and Art to be considered within the same category.
According to Tolstoy, literature is a type of art that falls into the category of beautiful art. He defines literature as “the human expression of thoughts and feelings in words” (pckt pg. 26). literature, like all beautiful art, is created for the sake of its beauty and does not serve any practical purpose.
It is a means of communication between the author and the reader; the author expresses his thoughts and feelings in words, and the reader experiences these thoughts and feelings vicariously through the literature. Tolstoy believed that literature was the highest form of art because it was the most direct form of communication between artist and audience.
Art, on the other hand, is a type of useful art. It includes all works that have a practical purpose such as painting, sculpture, architecture, etc. Art is created for the sake of its usefulness; it is meant to be used or experienced in some way. Tolstoy believed that art was not as effective as literature in communicating the artist’s thoughts and feelings to the audience because it is indirect; the audience experiences the artist’s thoughts and feelings vicariously through the art, but they are not directly communicated.
In What is Art, as we have seen before, Tolstoy maintains that art should not be defined in terms of beauty. Rather, he focuses on the work’s communicative potentialities – especially its infectiousness, clarity, and sincerity. As a result, any piece of creative work demonstrating all three criteria to some degree is regarded a work of art. The degree to which something is genuine, clear, and contagious determines the quality of a work of art. In this essay I attempt to analyze what art is good for — particularly regarding ethics — using Tolstoy’s stated definition.
According to Tolstoy, the main function of art is to transmit feelings. The artist must create a work that will evoke certain feelings in the viewer and the viewer must be able to feel those same emotions. The ability of the work to evoke these feeling is what Tolstoy calls “infectiousness.” In order for a work of art to be truly effective, it must be able to infect the viewer with the emotions that the artist was feeling when they created the piece. If the artist is not sincere in their feelings, then the work will not be effective. The sincerity of the artist is what Tolstoy calls “sincerity.”
The final quality that a work of art must have is “clarity.” A work of art must be clear in its emotional message. If the viewer does not understand the emotions that the artist is trying to communicate, then the work has failed.
All three of these qualities are necessary for a work of art to be successful. A work of art must be able to evoke certain feelings in the viewer, and those feelings must be ones that the artist was sincerely feeling when they created the piece. The work must also be clear in its emotional message. If any of these three qualities are missing, then the work will not be effective.
What is important to take away from Tolstoy’s definition of art is that the purpose of art is not to create something beautiful. The purpose of art is to transmit emotions. A work of art is only successful if it is able to do this. It does not matter if the work is beautiful or ugly. What matters is that the emotions are communicated effectively.
The ethics of art are a topic on which I have a quite firm position. When it comes to questions of ethics, my standpoint is that art can be both good and bad. Literature as art may operate in both directions, depending on the writer and reader. Literature has always been a kind of communication since its creation, and excellent literature, whether it’s Trollope’s prose or Blake’s poems or Shakespeare’s plays or political propaganda, has always been genuine.
In this way literature can act as a moral compass, because it can be used to communicate the writer’s beliefs and values. In literature, the writer is always in conversation with the reader, and so literature has the potential to change people’s minds and hearts.
However, literature can also be written purely for entertainment, with no moral or ethical message. In this case, literature can be a force for good, providing enjoyment and escape from the mundanity of everyday life. It can also be a force for bad, if it promotes violence, hatred or other negative emotions.
Art, like literature, can be both good and bad. Art can be used to promote positive messages, such as peace, love and understanding. It can also be used to promote negative messages, such as hatred, violence and bigotry.
Literature has the ability to communicate a social or moral message to the general public throughout history. And excellent literature has always been contagious, sometimes even igniting reform and revolution. Literature presents the reader or audience with a situation we are unable to experience in real life, which raises moral or social issues. Swift’s satirical “Gulliver’s Travels,” which mocked contemporary social norms, and Dickens’ fiction, which called for change without going unheeded, were just two examples of this trend.
In a way, literature has always been a form of art because of its ability to transcend the pages and inspire people. Art, on the other hand, is often seen as something that exists purely for aesthetics. But what people fail to see is that art also has the ability to raise social or moral issues. Whether it’s in the form of a painting, sculpture, or even performance, art can be used to bring attention to an issue and create change.
For example, in the early 20th century, artists like Pablo Picasso used their work to protest the Spanish government’s treatment of its citizens. And more recently, Banksy’s street art has drawn attention to various political and social issues.
So while literature and art may be different in some ways, they both have the power to raise awareness and inspire change. And that’s why they’re both important.
