A while back I posted a working definition of “Great Art” on my Facebook page. It was something along the lines of, “Great Art is that which helps us empathize with others and leads us into a conversation with the divine.” I’ve been doing more thinking about it and want to propose another definition that moves in a little bit different direction. So my second attempt is this:

Great Art is communal and multi-dimensional.

What I mean by communal is that Great Art is meant to be experienced, either in it’s creation or in it’s observation by more than just the creator. No matter how aesthetically wonderful or visually impactful the art is, if it remains hidden away it can never be truly great. Sadly, for the size of the community and the platform are sometimes confused for greatness. Shows like American Idol and Saturday Night Live rarely produce truly great art. Some of the greatest artists of all time weren’t discovered until late in their life or after their death, think of Emily Dickinson or Van Gogh.

Secondly, what I mean by Great Art being multi-dimensional is that it has more meaning than it’s face value. A photo-realistic still life of a fruit arrangement has little chance of being Great Art because while it requires amazing technical skill, fruit is only so exciting. Conversely, an abstract piece that depicts suffering and grief may be difficult to interpret at first glance and easy to ignore. But when we often find that as we study it, because it draws us into an experience and makes us question and grapple with what we are looking at, we can learn far more about ourselves and the artist as a result. This is not to say that every abstract blob of paint on a page has great meaning or that every precise pencil line lacks meaning, simply that Great Art has a message and a story it is trying to tell and it may not always be obvious.

So… what do you think?

Filed under: life by Jonathan