There is no such thing as good art or bad art. its merely what art is more appealing or captivating to the eye than the others . For Example art displayed with vivid vibrant colors give off a more loud or happy emotion rather than a neutral colored painting because its more its more likely to capture a viewers attention. Or it could be that art speaks to to a person better than another piece of art might. Another reason could be that the story the art tells or the emotion it may give off to the viewer is better than the one before.
Above there are two paintings that I have chosen as good art and less appealing art. the left is Pablo Picasso's Weeping woman made in 1937. in this color he uses vibrant colors and abstract shapes to make the woman's face giving it a more interesting look . This is my idea of good art because not only does it tell a story its a very interesting piece because its different , and its not perfect which is what most artist of his time aimed for . The painting on the right is named " Jerez the Clown " by Higgins . this to me is an example of the less appealing art but it still isn't bad art because there are some good qualities about this piece. This was a less appealing piece for me because i'm one of those people who has a fear of clowns , and his facial expression along with him being a clown is just a horrible mix. but looking at this piece i like the color usage and the design on his collar. in conclusion the argument still stands wether there is such a thing as good art and bad art . and i feel that good art and bad art just doesn't exists because what one person may view as good art another may view as bad and vise versa.
