WHAT IS ART AND IS IT EVEN A QUESTION WORTH ASKING?
One answer is that whatever an artist produces is art which begs the question as to how to define an artist in the first place particularly in 2025 when ‘everyone’ is an artist. It could be argued that the democratisation of art has diluted the essence of art, making it overly accessible and less exclusive. This unprecedented level of access can offer a platform for marginalized voices, promoting diversity in ideas and representation rather than exclusivity and with art no longer limited to physical galleries perhaps democratisation was an inevitable consequence. As to what is art and what is not art, the traditional barriers have all but disappeared in a rapidly evolving world and a re-evaluation of the relationship with creativity is also inevitable. Are there any norms or standards still in place? A conversation between two art aficionados that I overheard yesterday suggested that little had changed. Art was a tightly rendered piece of realism. Technological advancements played no part. The suspicion about advancements not only in the tools for creating art but a definition of art itself was based upon unwarranted hype for a technological approach. As one said, who do you know that is making art using AI in the first place? No doubt similar thoughts were expressed all though the 20th century as radical practices became mainstream.
One consideration is not just the form art can take or its proliferation but the transformation from an exclusive activity amongst a chosen few to a collective reawakening to the role art plays in lives. During isolation the impetus engendered by the COVID-19 pandemic, turned people to music, literature, dance, and visual art as a means of connection. People who had never met each other played instruments and sang from apartment block balconies and the like. Whether that connection continued after lockdown was lifted is another matter. The possibility though of shaping and defining the nature of a functioning society along artistic lines, remained extant. The former constraints of religion, class, country or ethnicity dissolved in the face or globalism.
There is also the oft expressed assumption that the democratisation of art has accelerated and provided a platform for ecological and ethical considerations to evolve as subject matter. In this context, art can be a tool for activism—transforming viewers into participants in social and environmental movements. Much the same sentiments were expressed through two world wars and the Vietnam conflict as art turned into propaganda. There is no doubt that art can raise awareness about urgent global issues but such art is often of its time suggesting that any art that lives on has in some way resonated with a different set of ideals. Art has always been a reflection of its time, a mirror that is held up to culture, values, and aspirations.
However, a definition of art is more fluid than ever with multifactorial influences shaping human experience in particular with the invasive and destructive tendencies of social media overriding the positives of it as a creative tool. However, to regard memes as art does no more than democratise the definition to include the lowest common denominator, however well-intentioned. I would also argue that traditional art in the form of painting has little to offer to influence societal thinking beyond the intensely personal. In another realm entirely the numbers of the curious attending sculpture events such as Sculpture by the Sea and Cottesloe Beach might suggest that sculpture has a much greater pull but I doubt that any societal message beyond the obvious references to ecological matters occurs to the majority who see little beyond the clever.
While some argue that the human experience is indispensable in the artistic process, others contend that art’s value lies in its capacity to provoke thought and emotion, regardless of its origin. In this regard, engaging with the question of what art is compels questions about the broader notions of creativity, expression, and inspiration. Is art purely an artifact, or is its value tied to the emotions it evokes in the beholder? Is the creator’s intention or the audience’s interpretation more critical in defining art’s essence? Is art inherently linked to societal and political contexts, or can it exist as a stand-alone form of expression above and beyond having a purpose?
In a globalized environment cultural exchanges are instantaneous and ubiquitous suggesting not just a broadening of the base of participation but a rapidly expanding homogenisation wherein the cultural identities of countries become a global singularity. With artists from all continents gathering in a city such as New York and residences opening up around the globe, differentiation becomes more problematic. However, at its core, art is a deeply human endeavour, a longing for genuine human connection. Time has demonstrated that although the form art can take has altered with each generation it is its ability to adapt that has been most valued.
In the end the question is not ‘what is art?’ or even what purpose it serves but an acceptance that it is an integral part of being human.