Does Art Have to Tell a Story?

For centuries, philosophers and artists believed that art must tell a story or have important meaning. In order to fully appreciate the artwork, viewers had to “read” this story from the image and understand its meaning.

Andy Warhol: 16 Jackies

In the 1700s, philosopher Sir Joshua Reynolds stated that great art must tell a major story. He even described the acceptable themes—Greek and Roman mythology and material from the Bible. Subjects such as portraits, landscapes, and still lifes were less important in art. While this may seem old fashioned today, many people still believe that art should express some great idea or tell a story. Therefore, to fully appreciate and understand a work of art, viewers must understand the message behind the work.

Jacques Lipchitz: Prometheus Strangling the Vulture II

This concern for meaning in art expanded in the mid-1800s. Some artists rejected the major art subjects and instead depicted scenes of everyday life and common objects. Others began to reject realistic work altogether and explored other types of images. As the messages became less obvious, viewers were challenged to decipher a story or understand the meaning of the work.

George Segal: The Diner

From the Walker Art Center's website "So, Why is this Art?" http://schools.walkerart.org/swita/switaact2.html

For one of these works, write a brief story about what you think is happening from the point of view of one of the people in the image. Look for visual clues in the artwork to help you add details to your story.

Turn it in to Ms. Ridlen for the chance to earn extra credit. If it is high quality work, you could earn up to 15 extra credit points.