How Do You Interpret Art?
Have you ever been left confused while watching a movie or show where a couple of people are describing an art piece? Or rather seen some artwork sell for millions of dollars, and you cannot understand why?
Or why certain artists are revered and some not as much? Then you're like me or used to be like me.
When I watch movies like The maiden heist, Trance and I hear the people talk about what the paintings mean to them and how the artist’s state of mind is reflected in the strokes, symbols and styles. I always have one question. How do you know all this fgs? How??? Did the artist explain the painting? Did (S)he leave a note? Were you his/her close friend? How then???
Anyway, this curiosity has led me to do find out how people know these things and share it with you (you’re welcome).
How do you interpret art?
Well, I don’t know or rather I did not know, so I did what every curious person would do and typed ‘how do you interpret art’ into google. I read a few articles, came across some insightful stuff and a few theories that were quite interesting, but I was not satisfied. I then decided to ask people. Not just anyone but people in the art industry; artists, curators, and art lovers. How do they view art, do they have a method for interpreting art and if they do, what is that like? Guess what I found out?
You know those articles I talked about? They had a process of interpreting art, which was basically an inquisition. There were many steps and procedures, but the essence of the process can be broken down into two parts. What can you see? and Why are the things you can see there?
What can you see? Jerry Saltz calls this seeing out loud; describe what you can see, the colours, the composition, the shapes, the material etc. When you have done this, move to the next stage: Why? Why those colours? shapes? symbols? This step is a bit tricky because there is no right or wrong answer, however, this is where context comes in, things like knowledge of the artist, the time frame the painting was made could come into play here. For example: Picasso’s Guernica in 1937
When you look at it, one of the first things you’d notice is that it is black and white, then you might notice the screaming horse in the middle or the wailing women by the sides and the man on the floor?
Then you ask yourself why? Why did Picasso put all these people in turmoil? You read about Picasso, find out he was Spanish and then realize the Spanish civil war was going on in 1937. The painting therefore, may be a representation of the effects of the war. You dig deeper, the name Guernica, a city devastated by bombings during the war; could this be an anti-war painting or just a description of the events of the war? So next question? Why is it black and white? It could be the bleakness of war or the fact all media used to break the news was in black and white, and Picasso was doing the same, you could go on and on adding extra layers and interpreting it.
It is, however, important not to dwell too much on what the artist’s intentions were because we have come to know that artists seldom have a singular message they’re trying to pass across. Art sometimes is to start a conversation.
I spoke to a few curators next, but none seemed to have a particular system, they did, however, have things they intuitively looked for, one thing that stood out for me was that to them the artist is just as important as the work. In one of my conversations, a curator said experiencing art is just like music sometimes, you see a piece that provokes you, and as you do when you listen to a good song, you look for more works from the artist, and the more you learn about the artist and their work the more you connect to them. When I quizzed more about if there was a way to interpret it, I got this response.
“This is usually the bummer question non-collectors ask. And here’s the trick. Art is philosophical and permeates from the soul of the artist expressing their thoughts, worldview, and feelings through forms and medium.
Often times, artists start a body of work and each step dictates what the next step of the work should be. It is a continuous dialogue with their canvas or paper. So instead of interpreting what the artist is trying to convey, you should instead look at what you can see and what you are “seeing” means to you, based on your own worldview, background etc.
A great example is a 1985 installation by Jeff Koons titled, One Ball Total Equilibrium Tank. Most people walking into the exhibition saw a Spalding floating in a tank. But if you truly look, you see the ball as a metaphor for the role sport took in a lot of communities and their rise in society. Lower-class households and communities who through sports floated into wealth. Or from another perspective, you could see life as a perpetual state of unknown — neither floating nor sinking. The key to great collecting is framing the work from your world view and not so much on struggling to ‘see’ what the artist is communicating. Sometimes, it doesn’t happen that seamlessly.”
-Merhdor-Attah
Casual art lovers were next on my list and when I asked them what they thought? Many said “vibes” that their feelings at the point of experiencing the art determines how they see it, it could have multiple meanings, some did not even care for the meanings, as long as it looked nice or evoking, that was enough for them.
We have spent all this time talking about art, it is, therefore, only logical to ask the artists themselves, right? Saussure's sign/signifier concept explains that what you intend to say when you speak/write/draw or paint is not always how the audience receives it. How people interpret signs is dependent on the arbitrary relationships they have made with the signs, and these are mostly determined by personal experiences. For example, I could say, "I saw her duck (the animal)" and, you would interpret it as me seeing her bend to avoid something.
Do you remember literature in secondary school? When our teachers claimed the blue curtains in a text represented the coldness of the author and other funny things? Art is no different; artists design something but the audience see a different message. Is that bad? Not really, would it annoy the artists? Maybe, maybe not.
The artists I spoke to said they did not care much how people interpreted their work as long as it was appreciated. Artists create for various reasons, and there are times artists produce works based on how they are feeling with no intended underlining meaning. For example a lot of people believe Salvador Dali’s The Persistence of Memory shows how irrelevant our obsession with time is during and outside the dream state, how we are always rushing in our daily lives to get things done even though time is all relative and probably meaningless. However, when Dali was asked about what the painting meant he claimed he did not know.
We often see life through special lenses; these lenses have different films based on our knowledge, experiences, and ideologies. When we look at anything, a movie, a news headline, or a piece of art, we see them through these lenses, sometimes we add new layers of film as we progress in life, and other times we remove some. If you want to interpret art, you must do it your way and with your lens. Of course, the more knowledge you have the clearer the picture, but we should never forget to make sure the lens we are looking through is truly ours, because of what use is it to see if you cannot see clearly and freely?