I chose to talk about topic 3 for the Richardson project. I feel as though Richardson would say that art is something that should improve society. He felt that art was something that should improve man through lessons, much like the paintings we looked at by Hogarth where there was a story being told that would possibly scare the pants off of people with the morality ideas they had had. I however do not believe that the goal of art should be to better society in any way, that being said I do not believe that it should go against society either. I believe that art is something that represents an expression of the self, for example if you were really influenced by the war and you painted something that showed your emotions towards it. Richardson would tell me probably that this was dumb and tell me I was being stupid probably.
I am a huge fan of Leonardo Davinci’s work, “Mona Lisa”, as well as a billion other people on this earth I am sure. I am not a gigantic fan of the work which we studied in class “A Harlot’s Progress”, which was something that was just a wretched and sad tale of a girl who lost her life to whoredom.
Richardson would disagree with me probably and have both pieces of art switched around in his mind. He would probably talk about how the “Mona Lisa” was one that lacked anything that would give worth to the betterment of society as it pertained to the “purpose” of art. And he would also probably infer that he quite enjoyed the piece by Hogarth, probably would say that it displays correct standing in the idea of morals and how people should look at life. He would agree with the fact that the horrific display in Hogarth’s piece was one that shoed the “worst case scenario” of what would happen to a woman if she chose the path of sexual pleasure instead of staying conservative which was widely popular of that time. Like the ways that Hogarth tried to better society with his works, Richardson would go along with him and say that this is correct. Richardson seemed to believe that there was a right and wrong way to “art”, which is why he would agree with the lessons being taught in the pieces that were done by William Hogarth.