PLATO HIGH SCHOOL ESSAY CONTEST
Kiran Sampath
About me:
I am a student, I am a daughter, I am an athlete, I am an artist, I am a sister, I am a musician, and I am a philosopher. I live in Lincoln, Rhode Island with my two parents and two siblings. My parents are both doctors -- a precedent in both their families of Indian origin. My older brother is a freshman at Brown University studying the Classics, while my younger brother is an outgoing eighth grader and a renowned polo player. I attend Moses Brown school in Providence, Rhode Island. At school I am captain of both the varsity soccer team and the varsity squash team, I participate in jazz band, take painting and drawing, and love to write. If you want to know who I am on a generic level, this would be my response. But if you truly want a summary of who I am it cannot be found in the classes I take and the grades I get and through my achievements, but rather through my thoughts. I see the world differently than other people I suppose. I have a lot of friends, but I feel like most people my age do not truly understand me because I am quite insightful for a 16 year old. Sometimes I am happy and other times I am sad for reasons I cannot explain. And for this reason I am just like any other human, but I seek to bring a deeper meaning to my life and my attempt is reflected through Philosophy.
Moses Brown School
Junior
(401) 829-8117
Can art actually be defined? No. How can one give a concrete definition to a concept that is inherently abstract? It conforms to no one but the artist. It takes on a life of its own, transcending the boundaries of society. Art is whatever the artist intends for it to be. That said, though, there is one thing that art must be: creative; it must be a product of the human mind, the fruit of human genius. Art gives us the ability to translate our thoughts and emotions into creative masterpieces. But to not use our individual brains in the production of art, is a dishonor to the innovative capacity of each human brain. To produce something only physically, is not art--in the world of art it is plagiarism, simply following the instructions developed elsewhere. Hence, art can be anything—visual or not—that originates in the human mind and expresses the deepest sentiments of the human heart.
Art has no limits except for where it originates. It can take many forms: music, paintings, even unprecedented forms, like instructions on painting: “The artist’s name is Sol LeWitt. But when they read more about him and his work, they learn that the shapes on the wall weren’t actually painted by LeWitt. Instead, his assistants painted them according to his very detailed written instructions.” Even though LeWitt may not have painted the shapes himself, it was his mind that portrayed how the shapes should look. This is art, because art is not about the physical product, but rather about original thought, which is why even many unfinished paintings are considered so highly in the world of art.
Art is ultimately a microcosm of an artist’s own biases and opinions on the world, and art only has meaning as art if the artist uses his or her mind to create it. For example, the fire extinguisher the boy questions is not art because it was simply manufactured in a factory, like many others. No human drew from their mind or soul to create it. It reflects nothing; it is not art. Real art reflects a conflation of political, racial, elitist beliefs from the artist. If there is no artist, there is not art. As a consequence, nature is not art. It is beautiful, but not art.
Another question is posed here: must all art be beautiful? To answer, you must first ask yourself: what is beauty? If it is objective, then should not the artist attempt perfection? But if it is subjective, does not the concept of beauty vary amongst the viewers? And if it art has both subjective and objective qualities, must the piece be partially beautiful? The perception of art changes for each person, and for many it is not always beautiful. Take for example Pablo Picasso. While renowned critics, and even my Spanish teacher, would argue that Picasso’s work is revolutionary, spectacular, and beautiful, in my eyes, most of his cubist paintings are not visually appealing. Thus art must not be beautiful, if beautiful is to appeal the human eye, but if beauty is that which invokes human emotion, then art is the epitome of beauty.