The art my group decided to frame was part of a tree with vines growing over it. The object is large and has a lot of texture. You can feel the texture of the vines and leaves along with the roughness of the bark. The tree itself was pretty monochrome with a grey trunk, but the vines added a pop of color with the brown and bright green. The art piece is not just a flat piece of work because the texture of the tree trunk and the texture of the vines adds something to it as well. The art piece itself evokes emotion as the vines are crawling up the tree. I would say its disturbing and uncomfortable to look at because of the vines that are crawling up the tree. I feel like this represents the corruption of life where the tree represents life and the vines crawling and slowly taking over the tree represent life being corrupted.
My art was not art before I put a frame around it. I would not consider it art without the frame because I would not stop and contemplate vines growing on a tree while walking to my class. Without the frame I would not stop and look at vines on a tree because I’ve seen vines on a tree before and nothing about it screamed art to me. I feel like myself and other people would overlook vines growing on a tree and would not consider it art in the everyday life because people see trees all the time.
Once the frame is taken away from the art I don’t think other people would consider it art anymore, but I would. I don’t think other people would consider it art anymore, because unless they saw it with the frame previously they would just think it was a tree with vines growing on it and would not take the time to contemplate if it was art or not. I would still think it was art without the frame because with the frame on I took the time to really think about why it should be considered art and that thought process would not go away once the frame is removed.
I do not think art lies in the body of the object. If someones intention was to create art then it is art, and that is dependent on the intention of the artist. If someone made something that was not intended to be art then it would not be art, and if someone made something with the intention of it being art then it would be considered art. Things are also considered art when it evokes an emotion or reaction from someone, and if someone does not have a reaction to a supposed art piece than it would not be considered art to them.
I think that there are lots of things that I would consider art that are not objects. One of them is dance, where people create different dances that are designed to evoke different emotions. Another form of art is music, and that could be playing an instrument or even singing. Art could also be writing and poetry. All of these different things are considered art to me and none of them are objects but they all evoke different emotions and reactions from people.
I believe art resides in the experience of the viewer. Different things evoke different emotions and reactions and people view them as art. Art is something that makes you feel a certain way toward, and it does not only reside in the object but in the person themselves. People take time to view and analyze different things that they would consider art and that does not mean that everyone else also considers that thing art as well. Just like I took time to analyze the tree with vines and considered it art, other people might not give it the time of day and would just consider it a tree and go on with their day.
Brielle Sunseri 