Blog Prompt 11

“If only the spectators or auditors are infected by the feelings which the author has felt, it is art (What is art).” Leo Toltsey argues that art can only truly be good art if the viewer or reader is able to feel the same emotion or feeling that the artist was feeling when writing or painting their work. Essentially saying that if you read a poem that the poet intended to be sad and you weren’t drawn to feelings of sadness then the poet didn’t do their job correctly. Tolstoy later explains how he feels that art brings us together, which is an idea that I 100% agree with. Art on the most broad level is the unity between people through expression and feeling. This is how I always perceived art to be, people connecting or bonding over shared emotions that someone has once felt before. With all of the disconnect in the world I feel like art is so powerful because it can bring people together no matter what that person may believe or look like. In a world where people are stuck in ‘in groups’ and cliques, I think art has done a great job at breaking down all of those exteriors and causing people to feel more connected. If people couldn’t feel connected on an artistic level then we would indeed be more ‘savage’ like. Tolstoy touches on this idea as he said, “And if men lacked this other capacity of being infected by art, people might be almost more savage still, and, above all, more separated from, and more hostile to, one another (What is Art).” I do believe that art can be measured in the way that Tolstoy has measured it but I also believe that just because someone may not have the same reaction to your art that you intended doesn’t necessarily make it bad art. If I were to come up with a great way to measure art I would say that there is no actual way you could do that because of how unique art is. I have seen paintings that were sold for a lot of money that I didn’t really see the value in, essentially it is up to the viewer. I think that Tolstoy puts a lot of pressure on the person creating the art but if the viewer isn’t moved by what the artist created then that doesn’t necessarily make that art ‘bad’. Just like beauty is in the eye of the beholder, that is how I like to understand the beauty in art. Subject matter to me does not matter when deciding between something being good or bad, it’s all about how the person feels in the end. This is important because even if I wasn’t a fan of horror films I could watch one and be able to say if it is a good movie or not. Bringing individuals out of their isolation using art is Tolstoy’s biggest argument and he stresses that everyone feels the same feeling because that is essentially what makes it powerful. When a group of people all have the same feeling towards something there’s no telling what can be done when they put their minds together and I think that is what Tolstoy is trying to convey to us. Although I do disagree with saying that art is bad just because you didn’t invoke the same feelings the artist did, I do agree with the general point that art is supposed to bring out feelings in the viewer. The stronger the infection that is felt through art according to Tolstoy is the defining factor of what makes that art great. Although him and Aristotle have some similar feelings towards art I see a difference in how the imitation or infection is viewed. According to Aristotle, there are different forms of imitation and this imitation is only good if there are no errors and it is very close to the truth. Tolstoy on the other level does not stress being close to the truth but stresses the emotions the viewer should feel in relation to the art. Overall, I have taken key points from Plato, Aristotle, and Tolstoy and I understand all of their opinions when it comes to art.