This article explores a series of questions surrounding the nature of art, including its meaning, purpose, and value. Questions were distributed to a group of art students at Atlantic Technological University, primarily female students as our course is female dominated, in order to gather perspectives from individuals actively engaged in creative practice in education. The participants chose which questions to engage with.
As an art student myself, I am repeatedly confronting these uncertainties within my own practice. I chose to ask questions that are intentionally broad and, somewhat, difficult to answer. Rather than seeking definitive answers, this investigation aims to explore the complexity of these questions and how different individuals approach them. This promotes profound contemplation in art practice.
1. What makes something art rather than just an object?
Z: “A found object will always be a found object unless significant change is. Art is something that has meaning, it has effort put into it. It’s not like that art piece where a banana was taped to a wall and sold for millions. Art is everything … but everything is not art.”
A: “Ideas and concepts can be considered art rather than something tangible.”
2. Is emotional impact more important than technical skill?
T: “I’m not a big fan of choosing between two extremes, because I believe that this kind of dichotomy doesn’t really exist. One tends to lose its strength without the other. A technically perfect work (example, a portrait or a still life) may impress many people, but without the artist’s personal expression, a distinctive touch or voice, it risks becoming faceless among countless other technically accomplished works”
“Simultaneously, a very emotional, honest, and unique work that breaks all the academic rules (composition, colour harmony, balance, etc.) not intentionally but simply because the artist doesn’t know how to handle them, can end up feeling careless or even indifferent to the viewer.”
In my view, both skill and meaning deserve attention. The key is to find balance between them and to break the rules consciously, in the interest of the work itself!
A: “It depends on what you’re trying to convey, I would say emotional impact is more important. While technical skill can help depict specific ideas, emotional impact and underlying meaning of a piece matter more than technique, because art ultimately exists to move and inspire people rather than just to demonstrate technical ability.”
C: “No, they are of equal importance, they are not definitive of good art. One is not more valuable than the other in the art making.”
3. Does art need meaning, or can it exist purely for beauty?
S: "I think it can exist for both. An example of art existing for aesthetics is an artwork that’s bought for interior design purposes. This is more commercialised art and is usually bought by people outside the art world. So, for me, as an artist, I am okay with commercial art. Although some artists are not.”
C: “Art exists within a context but can also be purely beautiful, and neither is more valuable. However, “art for art’s sake” feels somewhat redundant, as beauty isn’t the most important goal and is subjective.”
4. Why do some artists hate commercial art?
H: “It makes art into a commodity, a product rather than something happening in the world. It becomes purely aesthetic.”
C: “Commercial art relies heavily on the language of design & marketing. What is marketable and profitable. I don’t think that’s the reason why a lot artists create, obviously we all have to survive and that is definitely a facet of commercial art. Example, Freize art fair and lots of other commercial art spaces are profiting off artist labour. When commercial art is created, it doesn’t always come from a place of truth, in my opinion.”
5. Is art universal, or does its meaning always depend on culture?
H: “I think art is universal, there has always been a desire for humans to make art like cavemen. Art reacts and contributes to culture and shapes it and contradicts it making it very confusing”
C: “Creativity and creation is universal, as we are always creating in different ways. However, art cannot exist outside of culture and context, since we don’t exist in a vacuum and context shapes it.”
6. Does art need to be understood to be appreciated
H: "I think when there’s art you don’t understand and don’t appreciate it, but when you learn to understand it you can appreciate it. Your personal response to it might remind you of yourself or something in your life. Appreciation is understanding, you might appreciate it more once you understand it. You don't have to like it."
A: “No, not all art can be appreciated if the artist’s intended message doesn’t come across; even so, recognizing the technical skill involved is still a form of appreciation.”
7. Is art ever truly finished, or just abandoned?
A: “Most art is abandoned rather than finished. There’s always something you could change or improve, but at some point, you decide enough is enough. Letting go is part of the process. Sometimes ‘finished’ art can look over-worked, even ruined. I like that idea of letting the viewer finish the piece in their head.”
8. Does the intention of the artist matter, or only the viewer’s interpretation?
A: “Intention matters, but it isn’t everything. Once the work is out in the world, it no longer belongs entirely to the artist. The viewer brings their own experiences, and that shapes meaning just as much. Not all art is immediate or obvious in its impact. Sometimes the value of a piece exists independently of the viewer’s reaction it can hold meaning, intention, or presence even if no one responds to it in the moment.”
S: “It depends on what we mean by “reaction.” If we’re talking about strong emotional responses, then no, not all art needs that.”
E: “If something creates no response at all it can be difficult to engage with”
A: "I don’t think art needs to have meaning and art can be created for beauty solely, but that doesn’t mean people can’t interpret it and find their own meaning. I also think there’s an immense pressure for artists to create only art with deep meaning”
9. What role does emotion play in art?
E: “Emotion is often what makes art feel alive.”
“It creates a connection between the work and the viewer, even if that feeling isn’t easy to explain. Without emotion, art can feel distant or purely technical, with it, it becomes meaningful.”
“Even subtle emotions are what stay with us the longest.”
A: “Emotion and the human experience are pivotal to art”
10. Do you think there is such a thing as bad art? Why or why not?
R: “No, I think people are too quick to call something “bad” just because they don’t understand it. I’ve seen work I hated at first, and then later it made sense in a completely different way. Art isn’t meant to please everyone, so calling it bad feels limited. Not everything deserves to be defended just because it’s called art. If something feels lazy or thoughtless, people can tell. Subjective doesn’t mean anything goes, it means we can argue about it.”
S: Part of me thinks no, because everything could mean something to someone. But at the same time, I’ve seen work that just feels empty, like it’s missing something. Maybe it’s not “bad,” just unfinished in a way that isn’t visible.
A: No, I don’t think there’s such a thing as bad art, that gets confused with ‘technically bad’ art. I think art is its own language and even if a piece conveys a message you don’t like, it still has a right to communicate.”
11. If art did not exist in society, what do you think humanity would lose?
C: “Humanity wouldn’t lose just one big thing. Instead, we would lose a bit from many different parts of life. Firstly, we would lose one of the ways cultures are created and passed on. Art helps people express the identity of a nation or a community and reflect their values and history.
We would also lose an important way of thinking about problems. Through art we can talk about difficult emotions, experiences, and social issues in a way that sometimes words cannot express. Art is a way of learning. Through paintings, music, films, and literature we discover a lot about ourselves, about other people, about different cultures, and about history. Art helps people process trauma. It gives people a way to express and understand their feelings.
Without art, we would also lose a way to expand our view of the world. Even people who don’t create art, but just experience it (exhibitions, looking at artworks, discovering new artists) develops visual awareness and a deeper understanding of the world. We would lose a lot of joy. Especially for people who create art. When you make something that’s important to you, it gives you a sense of meaning. When you finally reach a moment where everything comes together and you realise that you managed to say what you intended that feeling is incredibly powerful. If art disappeared, humanity would lose something in almost everything we do.”
Across the responses, most people agreed that art is not defined by one single factor.
Instead, it exists through a balance of emotion, meaning, skill, and interpretation.
Many participants emphasised that art creates a connection-either emotionally, intellectually, or culturally-and that this connection is what gives it value.
A clear pattern across the responses is that art is valued for its ability to communicate, evoke emotion, and create meaning, even if that meaning is not fixed or universally understood. Concurrently, there is no consensus on what makes art "good," meaningful, or complete, suggesting that ambiguity is an essential part of what art is.
The range of answers highlights why these questions were important to ask in the first place. They reveal that art is not just an object, but an experience shaped by perception, context, and intention.
Ultimately, rather than providing clear answers, this process reinforced the idea that the uncertainty surrounding art is what makes it significant. Also highlighting that the subjectivity of art should not be mistaken for arbitrariness.