As known today there
are two different ways in which art is viewed. The two ways are known as
Romanticism and Formalism. Romanticism is the more plausible of the two, its
states that art should be viewed with more than just rational elements and it
can express emotions within people. Formalisms states that the purpose of art
is for it to be viewed in a formal way that does not include emotion.
a)
Romanticism has more explanatory breadth
because it has a wider explanation of how art works. For example, the way everyone
views art in a different way, so when viewed different emotions surface because
it is interpreted differently. Romanticism art includes emotion as
interpretation. Formalism arts don’t focus on emotion, which doesn’t include
people using emotions to express themselves.
b)
There is a greater amount of explanatory
depth in romanticism than there is in Formalism because of the emotion
romanticism showcases. Emotion is important because it gives art a more
realistic and feasible sense also allows a connection between the people and
the art itself. Formalism doesn’t include emotion which doesn’t allow
connections.
c)
Formalism has more simplicity than
Romanticism because of the fact that there aren’t any emotions within this form
of artwork.
d)
Romanticism has a more constant
connection with our common sense because it can be realistic with the
different emotions. Formalism doesn’t have a meaning in which people can use to
connect so it can be considered free will.
1. Formalism
and Romanticism are most plausible cause of art.
2. Romanticism
has more explanatory depth, breadth and conservatism than Formalism; but
formalism has more simplicity than romanticism.
3. Therefore
Romanticism is the best plausible cause of art.
I agree with what you are saying about how romanticism is the best plausible cause of art but I disagree that it had more explanatory depth because I feel formalism has a little more depth than romanticism because it's more viewed without emotion so it has more reasoning than just an emotion.
ReplyDeleteI agree with all of your views, but I think that you could have elaborated your points a little more. For example, you could have gone into a little more depth when explaining simplicity and conservatism.
ReplyDelete