Question

For the formalist theory of art, what makes something a work of art? What is one issue with the theory? What is something that the theory would deem to not be art that seems like it should be considered art?

Answer 1

Formalism is a popular conventionla theory of art which is based solely on the analysis of the form and style of the specific art- that is the way the objects are made and their visual appeal. For formalists, the elements of composition in a work of art such as color, line, texture, shape and other perceptual aspects take the center stage in critiquing a work of art. Thus, according to them, everything which is necessary in understanding and analysing a work of art is contained within that work.

The isolated focus on form also indicates that the larger historical and social context of the emergence of the artist and his/her creation are regarded as inconsequential data by a formalist perspective. This sharp boycott of sociohistorical analysis has brought Formalism under a sharp criticism from art historians and postmodern art theorists as it assumption of a purely asocial style assumes that issues such a subject class, religion, gender, culture or violence do not shape the life of the artist and his/her disadvantaged or privileged position within society which may have shaped his/her choice of the medium, the object/subject of art as well the uniqueness of his/her genre or style. Thus, by ignoring the context for the emergence of the work of art, the formalist theory may not provide the best explanation (s) of the reasons for its creation.