Aelita Andre had her first show at the age of 4. This young "artist" sells her paintings for THOUSANDS of dollars and is the envy of many seasoned artists. One art writer claims that Andre's work CANNOT be considered art because she paints without intention. AnnaMurphy states:
Art is intentional. It may be intentionally simple; it may be intentionally complex; it may be intentionally decorative and trite. It may also be intentionally random and meat-centric (Fine-Arts students take note: cabana is a woefully underrated medium).
While I somewhat approve of AnnaMurphy's definition of "art", after watching Aelita Andre work, I see the young expressionist as an artist. She might not be able to verbalize or understand the emotions that she translates onto canvass, but she's definitely driven by an internal genius. For what it's worth, I would quicker purchase any of her pieces over any minimal art piece we've viewed in class.
CLICK HERE to check out more of what AnnaMurphy thinks art is and what she has to say about Aelita Andre devaluing abstract art.
I agree with you 100%. I think this is work of art. If art is simply an expression of the artist, result of the emotion that needs to burst out, interact with the audience in some form and shape and make them to question why, what,how...and let them to interpret the piece in their own way and raises their emotion...then it is piece of art. There is intention behind every doodle that a child draw. Just because we as adult can't understand that anymore, doesn't stop them from being recognized as artist.
ReplyDeleteI also agree with you 100%. Paint on canvas is intentionally placed, and the intuitive means with which an artist makes the decision to place color or form on a place on a surface is creative genius. Also art is subjective. To deny this child's creative talent is wrong...I believe all of us that hold creative talents are born with them and many of us had the good fortune to express them at an early age. And most parents would acknowledge that and help that child grow and develop. Andre's intention may be immature but her intuitive choices in color and form are real and come from within an emotional connection she has made with her paint and canvas. Thanks for posting this.
ReplyDeleteHow do we measure one's intent? Isn't art usually left to the viewers interpretation? Thank you for posting this, very interesting to watch her work.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteGerman expressionist, Paul Klee uses bright and right-out-of-tube colors to make paintings that have similar qualities to those of children. In fact, he was admiring and trying to mimic art that small children can produce. Artists do not always give a meaning to his/her art or create one with an intent. (Early Minimalists deny art as a self-contained object.) In my opinion, as long as some one sees Aelita Andre's works as art pieces (and willing to pay!) they are art. We should not set a border based on artist's age or intellectual development.
ReplyDeleteI don't think you can define what art is. It ca be whatever you want it to be. Just because one person doesn't share the same view as you about art doesn't mean it can't be considered out. It sad that they don't think her work is art. it's amazing! and she's def blessed to have such a skill set from such a young age.
ReplyDelete