Diana Bang's ETEC 531 e-portfolio

Originating in the 18^th and 19^th centuries, high art was considered to be an elitist cultural practice as depicted in paintings and sculptures whereas low art was then defined by commonly manually made craft and technology in the form of mechanics, drawing, and design (Murphie & Potts, 2003). This separation occurred between fine and applied arts due to the division of labour that was formed as a result of industrial capitalism.According to Jowi Taylor (2007), these distinctions are made in other areas than art (i.e. societal class systems) and are rooted in religion. He goes on to state that: “Shame is a human invention and the high/low distinction is one of its by-products – a fear of the carnal. The assumption is that “high art” appeals to those of refined sensibilities while “low art” is merely consumed like so much opium; the higher classes are predisposed to consider the finer things in life, dabble in philosphy and wine-collecting while the lower classes must concern themselves simply with survival; and that intellectual pursuits offer an escape from the tyranny of our appetites.” Moreover, Brian Eno is cited by Taylor (2007) stating that “the difference between high art and low art is that low art is unafraid to appeal to the senses, and high art is suspicious of the delicious, as if one were being seduced for impure reasons.”Ultimately, I think that art in any form connects with individuals on a variety of levels whether it be emotional, intellectual, and it shouldn’t matter whether it’s categorized as high or low. Thus, I agree with Taylor (2007) in that creating a distinction between high/low art is akin to snobbery as it differentiates class systems of elitists/high classes vs. other classes of society. However, unfortunately these separations still do exist even in today’s modern society. Furthermore, as Taylor (2007) boldly states no one has a claim on the “purity” of their appreciations of art and thus it is a mistake for people to attempt to preserve this distinction between high/low culture as it assumes that one culture gets a more refined, prestigious, unique experience that other cultures (i.e. the masses that consume pop music) could not achieve.

References:

Murphie, A. and Potts, J. (2003). Culture and technology. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.Taylor, J. (2007). Thoughts from the grove: High art/low art. Retrieved from: http://www.cbc.ca/radio2/blog/2007/06/19/thoughts_from_the_grove_high_a.html

Additional resources include:Barrett, T. (1997). Modernism and postmodernism: An overview with art examples. In J. Hutchens & M. Suggs (Eds.), Art education: Content and practice in a postmodern era (p. 17-30). Washington, DC: NAEA. Retrieved from: http://www.terrybarrettosu.com/pdfs/B_PoMo_97.pdfBright, B. & Blakewell, L. (Eds.). (1995). Looking high and low: Art and cultural identity. Tucson, AZ: University of Arizona Press.Efland, A. (2007). Interlude: Arts education the aesthetic and cultural studies. In L. Bresler (Ed.). International handbook of research in arts education (p. 39-44). Dordrecht, NL: Springer. Retrieved from: http://www.springerlink.com/content/un2125k316n77j1m/(*Note: According to Efland (2007) pop art eliminated the boundary between high/low art and minimalism erased the distinction between fine art and industrial process).Kruger, B. (1990). What’s high, what’s low? And who cares? New York Times, p.43.(*Note: In her article, Barbara Kruger (1990) rejects modernists’ hierarchical fixations of high vs. low culture for their “false authority, pat answers and easy systems“).