Tonight I wanted to talk a bit about produce ... fruits and vegetables ... in artwork. What made me think of this is the fact that, for the first time in many, many years, I have a vegetable garden. I was out harvesting some of my delicious home-grown produce today and it got me thinking about all the still life artwork I've seen. Much of it is of produce, particularly fruit. I love a beautiful bowl of cherries as much as the next person but, why would I buy painting of it when I already have a lovely bowl of real cherries on my countertop? I see it, right there, in reality. Why wouldn't I rather have art that is something I can't have in my house, like a waterfall, or a covered bridge?
Mind you, I am not dissing still life artwork in any way! I actually like it. I'm just trying to figure out why. It just seems odd to me that I'd want a painting of something already in my house. You'd think we'd all prefer to have paintings we can't have in our house, like landscapes, seascapes, wildlife, trains, planes, fantasies, etc. Yet still life is one of the most popular art subjects, both as what artists create, as well as what collectors buy. Why is that?
Again, I am not saying still life is not good art. I do like it. I'm just wondering why we want a picture of lemons on our wall when we already have them in the fruit bowl on the counter. What is it about such still life artworks that appeal to us so much?
Thoughts?
No comments:
Post a Comment