I chose to look at the third point on whether art should improve society. I don’t necessary think art should aim to improve society but I think art should serve as a way to represent society. I think art is a way for people to express their feelings and thoughts about their perception of reality. Art should serve as a means of understanding each other’s perspective on the world. It allows people to express their feelings without directly stating them and gives people a voice in matters they would not normally have one in. I think Richardson would argue that art should serve as a means to improve society. He states, “But pictures are not merely ornamental, they are also instructive.” I think this shows that aren’t is not just meant to be looked upon or decorate a house but are meant to portray something to us as a society.
This is a piece of modern art by Gina Marwaha and this to me is not art. I really don’t understand how a bunch of colors thrown together can be considered a work of “art”. I don’t see how Richardson would see this as art serving to improve society because I don’t see how one could argue that a bunch of splattered colors could be anything more than an ornament.
This is a piece of art by Norman Rockwell and I think this, and most of his pieces, serve a purpose to society. This piece and his others capture the American dream and happiness found in the simple things in life. I think Richardson would argue that this serves to improve society because it inspires people to live for the happiness of family, work, and happiness. I think that he would feel this work is not just an ornament but a positive message sent to society about hard work and strong family ties.