I think when looking at art history there have constantly been attempts to define or structure art, or fine art. The funny aspect of that is the many great movements of art that were in rebellion to established, highly regarded, or accepted academic notions. The Impressionists, Expressionists, Surrealists, and Dada were some prominent and recent rebellions to the established notions, and attempts of structure by noted museums and academies. Obviously not everyone likes the various works from this time period, but whether or not someone likes the works should not dismiss them as art.
Originally Posted by Stargazer
Just to take the Expressionist time, many of those artists could not get exhibited in the major salons and galleries of their day. Those established and highly regarded institutions attempted to impose a formal structure to art, mostly painting and sculpture during that time. It was only later in time that the Expressionist movement was recognized. This cycle has been repeated many times prior to that, and since that time . . . and probably will continue.
The museums and galleries attempt to control or define what is art, or what is not art. Exhibits outside established museums and galleries could be viewed as rebelling against establishment. There is rarely consensus in art; almost anything goes.
My feeling is that if anyone feels confused by my paintings or photography, then I have failed. Hopefully I avoid creating art for artists and people outside acidemia can appreciate what I create.
A G Studio