Please post by Tuesday, September 11.
Drawings like the one above in Chauvet were created thousands of years ago. The people who produced them had to undergo difficult conditions to draw them. In spite of the challenges, there are many caves throughout Europe with these masterpieces of the ancient world. Today, we refer to these paintings as "cave art." However the term itself makes the paintings seem inferior. It is as if the quality of compositions are lower than the quality of the art of Picasso or Leonardo Da Vinci. Should the modifier "cave" be removed? Should we refer to these drawings simply as art on the same par as the art of the Classical Age, the Renaissance, or even the modern period. Explain your reasoning and address what makes something art.
Please post by Tuesday, September 11.
26 Comments
Sophia G
9/13/2018 14:48:35
I don't believe that cave art should be referred to as "art". When cavemen were drawing these, their sole purpose was to draw what they had killed or eaten for personal or spiritual purposes only. For something to be considered as a peice of art, I think the artist behind it should have a purpose of making the person veiwing it feel a certain way or think differently about a certain topic. When these cave drawings were being made, the person making it most likely had no thought or emotion put into the peice, therefore not making it art.
Reply
Catherine H
9/13/2018 21:44:17
Considering cave art to be recognized as real art, would disagree with many people's opinions. I would have to disagree with this consideration as well. All talented artists had a passion for their work, and with these cavemen, they did not. Cavemen did not do this pieces to show off their talents. Cavemen did these drawings to represent what their life was like. For example, they would draw what they would hunt. These people wouldn't do it for the money, they would do it for themselves.
Reply
Sadie B
9/13/2018 14:59:43
I don't think we should drop the word "cave" in cave art because the cavemen didn't consider this art. They considered this a drawing of what was going on in their life. Their purpose of their drawings were to show what they eat and how they kill their food. It wasn't to get famous or to get money from them, it was for their own personal self. If it was art, then the cavemen would want it to be shown and not to hide it in a cave. Cave art will always have the word "cave" and always the word "art" but that doesn't mean the cavemen considered it art.
Reply
Paige M
9/13/2018 15:32:11
I believe that we should not drop the word "cave" in front of art. The cavemen who drew this were not trying to make art for people to look at. They made it for religious purposes and to tell a story about their lives. This is not worth any less than Picasso or Leonardo Da Vinci's work, but it is nothing like the modern art we have now. I do not think "cave" degrades the art work. We should not drop the word "cave".I believe that we should not drop the word "cave" in front of art. The cavemen who drew this were not trying to make art for people to look at. They made it for religious purposes and to tell a story about their lives. This is not worth any less than Picasso or Leonardo Da Vinci's work, but it is nothing like the modern art we have now. I do not think "cave" degrades the art work. We should not drop the word "cave".
Reply
Gabriella
9/13/2018 15:34:36
I feel that we should drop the “cave” in cave art, it is all art in my eyes. Art is something that has meaning and based on what the cavemen were limited to drawing with these were meaningful and detailed cave pieces that are pretty good. They had obviously taken time and effort to draw these pieces, and because of them we can now explore and learn from their drawings. They may have only drew what they hunted and ate but that is a story which has helped us when studying their lifestyles and what it was like back then. I see what some people may call cave art as the early stages in today’s art, so yes, on most levels this is worthy to be shown off.
Reply
Usman
9/13/2018 15:35:29
The cave art wasn’t considered art. It wasn’t made to look cool, or impress anybody. This was made to show what was happening, to tell a story, or to express what life was like at this time. People made changes to the cave at many years later, but when they were originally made, there was on intention of trying to make people worship this. The art should be preserved because it’s tells a story. These archiologists who study these “arts” get a better view of what life was like from that time. It’s like a book, it’s not art it’s informational, like these cave “arts.”
Reply
Emily H.
9/13/2018 15:46:32
I think that cave aren’t is real art. We had lots of debate on what determines art, and some of us think that the thought that goes into art is what makes it art. Cave art wasn’t just drawn for the entertainment, the humans who created those drawings pretty much started the evolution of art. Some of the pieces we looked at class were not just random figures drawn. The cave art shown must have taken lots of thought and concentration, which makes cave art “real art.”
Reply
Elliana Wu
9/13/2018 16:14:49
In my opinion, I believe that we should refer "cave art" as art. In class, we have discussed about what we believe is the definition of art. The standard of what art is to me is, whether or not if the person making the piece of art has a sentimental meaning behind it. Additionally, the piece of art should be able to have people wondering about what the story behind it is. On the whiteboard you have drawn a stick figure, which has no true meaning behind it, implying that when you drew it, you gave it no thought. Without a doubt, real art should have you wondering and looking for more, not making you walk over to the next painting. Therefore, making "cave art" actually considered more relevant than today's work. However, "beauty is in the eye of the beholder".
Reply
Amy S
9/13/2018 16:14:55
I believe that the word "cave" should not be dropped from art because I don't consider it art. Art should be thought-provoked, and I don' think that cavemen were able to actually process thoughts. Although I think cave art is interesting, it doesn't really interest me because how do I not know that it was just a bunch of different people drawing on top of each others drawing just for fun. I would also consider art as being abstract and creative or different. When I look at cave art, it doesn't really strike me for any of these things, which is why I don't think that it should be considered art.
Reply
Maddie K
9/13/2018 16:19:50
I do not think that cave art should be referred to as "art." Cavemen only painted these to tell a story and represent things that they have killed for religious reasons, not to show it off to others. If they referred to their drawings as art, they probably wouldn't want it to stay in the caves and would most likely put more effort into it if they were looking to impress people for money. For something to be classified as art, I think it should be unique and elegant, not just a blank canvas with a splash of color. Art should depict a high amount of skill, effort, and imagination.
Reply
Lucy K
9/13/2018 16:28:18
Although cave art could be considered art in some ways, it is not. To the men or women who drew on the caves, it was their way of speaking when language had not been established farther than grunts and moving their body. Also, the drawings could be argued to be labeled not as something less than art but just a certain type of art. For example, an adult could refer to a kid drawing on a restaurant kids menu as “child art”. To me, cave art is the same thing.
Reply
Angela Z
9/13/2018 16:33:48
The word Cave in "Cave Art" should not be dropped out. The cavemen's that drew this probably 100% did not know what art was or even the meaning. The reason why we shouldn't drop the word cave is because "Cave Art" was drew in caves and all they drew were people getting killed and people killing animals for food. The drawings shown in the cave are differently compared to modern day art. Picasso and
Reply
Amilcar Coutinho Amado
9/13/2018 16:41:47
I define art as a form of expressing yourself and telling stories through pictures, sculptures, etc. The cavemen or women that made the cave paintings to depict their lives. But also, I don’t think the word “cave” should be removed from the term “cave art”. Cavemen only painted these to depict the almost repeated things they did in their daily lives like hunting. It told a story, just like modern art does. But the difference is that rennesaince and modern art tells a story about things that have happened throughout history. It didn’t tell stories about daily life. A good example is the sculpture of David by Michealangelo. It tells a story about a war between two tribes in Israel. That’s art. And it doesn’t tell a story about someone’s day to day life. Finally, I do believe that the cave paintings are indeed art, but art usually doesn’t tell a story about daily life, but a story that’s interesting and captivating.
Reply
Samantha G
9/13/2018 17:03:21
Art is not simply drawings by famous artists. It is thought, creativity and meaning put into a piece of work. Cavemen went through many struggles in order to create these drawings in the cave with lack of prepared paint and brushes. Being able to work through these struggles and tell their stories by produce these images is what I believe makes them art. I don't think that we should drop the "cave" while mentioning these drawings. When we think of art today, we see the product on a canvas, or piece of paper. These cavemen created this art on the walls of caves. This is not a very simple task to do, especially since they did not have the resources ready such as the paints and brushes of today. Though because they are made on the walls of caves, people think this makes them inferior, but, I believe it adds a level of respect and praise for the artists that created them.
Reply
Abigail C
9/13/2018 17:26:06
E should refer to "cave art" as art because the cavemen who were painting them had a reason to paint these on the walls of caves. They put thought into how they'd paint them and where they could. The cavemen while with an unknown reason for why they did paint on the walls of a cave should have their paintings considered art.
Reply
Jack R
9/13/2018 18:19:27
Art is a form of expression. The “cave art” of ancient times shows interactions of people and animals. This art expresses how early people lived. The drawings should not be criticized because it is so basic . Even though it is done on a wall in a cave it should still be considered the same the art of the Renaissance or modern times. I feel that the meaning of the art comes from within the person who is making it or the person taking it in. This “cave art” expresses the thoughts and feelings of the ancient people. It shows how they saw the world, and their place in it.
Reply
Julia B
9/13/2018 18:34:13
I don’t think that the word “cave” should be dropped in front of cave art. By referring to it as cave art, it gives the word a new meaning. This is art that was well thought out due to the limited amount of time and supplies the artist had to work with. It has a purpose, whether it be religious or for a different reason, this art was done by an artist who had an emotional attachment to it. Although this is the definition of art, cave art was art that the artist felt absolutely needed to be drawn. Cave art was the only way civilization in the past could record anything as opposed to modern day art which is just a way of expressing ideas in a piece of art. To me, cave art and art are completely different so I don’t think that Picasso or any other artist can be compared to cave artists. Since they are so different I don’t think that the “cave” in cave art should be dropped.
Reply
Stephen D
9/13/2018 19:31:09
I believe that the modifier “cave” in cave art should not be dropped. This is because even though one may argue that it is the same as any other art piece, by calling it cave art, you are recognizing the difference in conditions and even the thought process of the cavemen who made this type of art actually felt. In today’s society, artists have all the resources necessary to design a good art piece with almost perfect conditions. However, these cavemen did not have this advantage. In fact, most likely the art they drew in these caves millions of years ago were just ways of them expressing their current life and how they were viewing the world they were in, rather than making art for other people to look at and buy like today. Therefore, by removing the word “cave” in cave art, you are completely altering the meaning of cave art and its original purpose. As a result, I feel that these two uniquely different types of art should not be combined into one category.
Reply
Amya
9/13/2018 20:03:53
I believe that the word “cave” should not be taken away from the word art. Although some people may argue it as art, the caveman had no intention in calling it that. Their point to get accross was how they lived and and tell their story before a language was formed and they could socialize in any other way then pictures. Artists like Picasso form masterpieces to yes, tell a story, but also to challenge the viewer to form an interpretation on the piece. Cave art was used to tell a specific story, one to follow by the exact path, as modern art is not. Therefore, it should not be put in the same category “art”.
Reply
Shawn N
9/13/2018 20:28:27
The cave art wasn’t considered art. It wasn’t made to look cool, or impress anybody. This was made to show what was happening, to tell a story, or to express what life was like at this time. People made changes to the cave at many years later, but when they were originally made, there was on intention of trying to make people worship this. The art should be preserved because it’s tells a story. These archiologists who study these “arts” get a better view of what life was like from that time. It’s like a book, it’s not art it’s informational, like these cave “arts.” But it’s what you think is art.
Reply
Nicole G
9/13/2018 20:34:38
Back in the years "cave art" was made to tell a story or to show something that happened in their lives. Cave men didn't have a language like we have today. Therefore cave art was used to express stories or feelings anyone had. Today artist use art to express feelings and stories just in a different way that cavemen used it. Because both art today and back then is used to express feelings, to draw emotion from people, or to tell a story cave art is considered art.
Reply
Mazinho P.
9/13/2018 20:45:04
I feel that we should keep the word "cave" in cave art simply because the word "cave" is defining what type of art it is. There are many different variations of art including Abstract, Modern, Classical Age, and Renaissance. Thus cave art is just another variation and still has the same thought process of evoking beauty and emotion. Art is difficult to explain but I believe it is a piece of human creativity that is meant to get a reaction out of the viewer. Cave art is like any other art, same thought process, creativity, and effort but it is different and unusual like some of Picasso's work. Keeping cave art the same is what makes it unique and falls within philosophy of art.
Reply
Sarah A. T
9/13/2018 21:03:28
I think the word "cave" should not be dropped from cave art because it is a specific type of art. The "cave" part of cave art shows the location of where the art was made but, also their way of life. The drawings show what they hunted and the animals around them. Art is described as the expression of human skill and imagination. Art can also be described as something that evokes human emotion. I definitely think that someone in the world can be emotionally attached to these paintings. However, I think it should be called cave art because the word "cave" gives special significance to the art. This is because it gives a person knowledge of the importance of what they are observing and what the lives of the people who drew them were like.
Reply
Armina P
9/13/2018 21:20:27
I believe "cave art" should be considered as art because the human beings who lived in the early centuries thought about what to draw and wanted to show the next generations of them how to live and how they used to live. We learn their lies by looking at these drawings on the walls of the caves they lived in. I think art means to be creative and draw or paint something that really means or shows something. I would consider those drawings as art because the artists really worked on them and spent their time on something that is important.
Reply
Elizabeth S
9/13/2018 21:55:42
I believe the "cave" in "Cave Art" should not be dropped due to the "cave" just being applied as a genre for the art as if you were to say "Modern Art" or "Classical Art". I also believe that cave art should be considered art as much as more traditional views of art, due to my belief that as long as the "artist" took some thought into the idea and meaning of the piece it should be considered for example a pre- schooler drawing a picture of their family as a gift or a college student planning out some oddly deep meaning to a big canvas painted white and naming it "Polar Bear in Snowstorm". These people who created this "cave art" whether it be for religious purposes or just plain spontaneity should be considered art due to the person taking the time out of their very dangerous life style just to make some paint and paint it onto a cave wall just for the sake of creating some of the first physical pieces of art itself.
Reply
Julia Perry
9/19/2018 17:39:47
I don't believe that cave art should be referred to as "art”. When I think of art I think of a price that was given thought and has multiple ideas and explanations for them. Real art makes people think and study the peice, but cave art is just a way that back then the people expressed what they saw by drawing the image, which is not art, but a way of trying to show people. When I think of a child’s art, it’s cute, but called children art. Cave art should be called cave art because that’s what it is and that’s what it should stay.
Reply
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorArchives
February 2019
Categories |